cdp climate change questionnaire 2018

CDP Climate Change Questionnaire 2018

C0 Introduction

Introduction

(C0.1) Give a general description and introduction to your organization.

Husky Energy is a Canadian-based integrated energy company. It is based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, and its common shares are publicly traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange under the symbol HSE. The Company operates in Canada, the United States and the Asia Pacific region with Upstream and Downstream business segments.

(C0.2) State the start and end date of the year for which you are reporting data.

Start date End date Indicate if you are providing emissions data

for past reporting years

01/01/2017 31/12/2017 No

(C0.3) Select the countries/regions for which you will be supplying data.

Country/Region

Canada and the United States. (Reserves applicable for Canada, China & Indonesia)

(C0.4) Select the currency used for all financial information disclosed throughout your response.

Currency

CAD ($)

(C0.5) Select the option that describes the reporting boundary for which climate-related impacts on your business are being reported. Note that this option should align with your consolidation approach to your Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas inventory.

• Operational control

Organizational activities: Chemicals

(C-CH0.7) Which part of the chemicals value chain does your organization operate in?

Bulk organic chemicals

• Ethanol

Bulk inorganic chemicals

• Hydrogen

Organizational activities: Oil and Gas

(C-OG0.7) Which part of the oil and gas value chain and other areas does your organization operate in?

Oil and gas value chain

• Upstream

• Downstream

Other divisions

• Carbon capture and storage/utilization

READER ADVISORIES

Forward-Looking Statements and Information

Certain statements in this document are forward-looking statements and information (collectively “forward-looking statements”), within the

meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation, Section 21E of the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

Section 27A of the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The forward-looking statements contained in this document are

forward-looking and not historical facts.

Some of the forward-looking statements may be identified by statements that express, or involve discussions as to, expectations, beliefs,

plans, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as “will

likely result”, “are expected to”, “will continue”, “is anticipated”, “is targeting”, “estimated”, “intend”, “plan”, “projection”, “forecast”, “guidance”,

“could”, “may”, “would”, “aim”, “vision”, “goals”, “objective”, “target”, “schedules” and “outlook”). In particular, forward-looking statements in

this document include, but are not limited to, references to: the Company’s general strategic plans and growth strategies; anticipated

increase to carbon related payments; potential financial impacts and time horizons of identified risks; potential climate-related opportunities

and their corresponding likelihood, time horizon, magnitude of impact, potential financial impact and the costs and strategies to realize the

opportunities; methane reduction target and associated timeline; number of emissions reduction initiatives at various stages of development

and their estimated annual CO2e savings; and anticipated investment in an hydrogen diluent reduction pilot project during 2018.

In addition, statements relating to “reserves” are deemed to be forward-looking statements as they involve the implied assessment based

on certain estimates and assumptions that the reserves described can be profitably produced in the future. There are numerous

uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of reserves and in projecting future rates of production and the timing of development

expenditures. The total amount or timing of actual future production may vary from reserve and production estimates.

Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected by the forward-looking statements presented in this document are

reasonable, the Company’s forward-looking statements have been based on assumptions and factors concerning future events that may

prove to be inaccurate. Those assumptions and factors are based on information currently available to the Company about itself and the

businesses in which it operates. Information used in developing forward-looking statements has been acquired from various sources,

including third party consultants, suppliers and regulators, among others.

Because actual results or outcomes could differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements, investors should not

place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve numerous assumptions,

inherent risks and uncertainties, both general and specific, which contribute to the possibility that the predicted outcomes will not occur.

Some of these risks, uncertainties and other factors are similar to those faced by other oil and gas companies and some are unique to the

Company.

The Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2017 and other documents filed with securities regulatory

authorities (accessible through the SEDAR website www.sedar.com and the EDGAR website www.sec.gov) describe risks, material

assumptions and other factors that could influence actual results and are incorporated herein by reference.

New factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for management to predict all of such factors and to assess in advance the

impact of each such factor on the Company’s business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual

results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement. The impact of any one factor on a particular forward-

looking statement is not determinable with certainty as such factors are dependent upon other factors, and the Company's course of action

would depend upon management’s assessment of the future considering all information available to it at the relevant time. Any forward-

looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made and, except as required by applicable securities laws, the

Company undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which such

statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

Disclosure of Oil and Gas Information

Unless otherwise indicated: (i) reserves estimates in this document have been prepared by internal qualified reserves evaluators in

accordance with the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook, have an effective date of December 31 in the years indicated and

represent the Company's working interest share before royalties; (ii) projected and historical production volumes provided represent the

Company’s working interest share before royalties; and (iii) historical production volumes provided are for the year ended December 31,

2017.

The Company uses the term barrels of oil equivalent (“boe”), which is consistent with other oil and gas companies’ disclosures, and is

calculated on an energy equivalence basis applicable at the burner tip whereby one barrel of crude oil is equivalent to six thousand cubic

feet of natural gas. The term boe is used to express the sum of the total company products in one unit that can be used for comparisons.

Readers are cautioned that the term boe may be misleading, particularly if used in isolation. This measure is used for consistency with

other oil and gas companies and does not represent value equivalency at the wellhead.

C1 Governance

Board oversight

(C1.1) Is there board-level oversight of climate-related issues within your organization?

• Yes

(C1.1a) Identify the position(s) of the individual(s) on the board with responsibility for climate-related issues.

Position of individual(s) Please explain

Director on board The Chair of the Health, Safety and Environment (“HS&E”) Committee of

the Board of Directors is responsible for the oversight of climate-related

issues as part of the committee’s mandate to assist the Board by

reviewing, reporting and making recommendations on the Corporation’s

policies, management systems and programs with respect to HS&E

issues. The Committee regularly reviews elements of Husky’s enterprise

risk matrix, which includes climate change as a critical risk. The

Committee is chaired by an independent director, meets at least semi-

annually and advises and reports to the Co-Chairs of the Board and the

Board on a regular basis as is responsibly appropriate.

(C1.1b) Provide further details on the board’s oversight of climate-related issues.

Frequency with which

climate-related issues

are a scheduled

agenda item

Governance mechanisms into

which climate-related issues are

integrated

Please explain

Scheduled - all

meetings

Reviewing and guiding strategy

Reviewing and guiding major plans of

action

Reviewing and guiding risk

management policies

Reviewing and guiding annual

budgets

The Health, Safety and Environment (“HS&E”) Committee of the Board of

Directors meets at least semi-annually with the mandate to assist the Board by

reviewing, reporting and making recommendations on the Corporation’s policies,

management systems and programs with respect to HS&E issues. Husky

includes climate-related issues as part of its definition of HS&E. The

Committee’s mandate lays out specific duties as follows:

Specific Duties & Responsibilities:

The Committee will have the oversight responsibilities and specific duties as

described below.

1. Review, on a periodic basis, the Corporation’s HS&E policy, management

systems and programs and any significant policy contraventions.

2. Review, on a periodic basis, the Corporation’s HS&E audit program and

significant findings resulting from the program.

3. Review, on a periodic basis, compliance with governmental orders,

conduct of litigation and other proceedings relating to HS&E matters.

4. Review, on a periodic basis, actions and initiatives undertaken to mitigate

HS&E risk and/or HS&E matters having the potential to affect the

Corporation’s activities, plans, strategies or reputation. In addition, the

Committee oversees the Corporation’s risk management framework and

related processes in relation to HS&E matters.

5. Conduct a periodic review of the Corporation’s environmental remediation

program.

6. Monitor, on a periodic basis, the relationship with regulatory authorities

and others outside the Corporation (including joint venture partners,

neighbouring property owners, stakeholders and shareholders) on HS&E

issues.

7. Act in an advisory capacity to the Board.

8. Carry out such other responsibilities as the Board may, from time to time,

set forth.

9. Advise and report to the Co-Chairs of the Board and the Board, relative to

the duties and responsibilities set out above, from time to time, set in such

detail as is responsibly appropriate.

Below board-level responsibility

(C1.2) Below board-level, provide the highest-level management position(s) or committee(s) with responsibility for climate-related issues.

Name of the position(s) and/or committee(s) Responsibility Frequency of reporting to the board on

climate-related issues

Chief Operating Officer (COO) Both assessing and managing climate-related Half-yearly

risks and opportunities

Executive Health, Safety and Environment

Committee

Both assessing and managing climate-related

risks and opportunities

Half-yearly

(C1.2a) Describe where in the organizational structure this/these position(s) and/or committees lie, what their associated responsibilities are, and how climate-related issues are monitored.

Climate-related issues are managed by the Executive Health, Safety and Environment Committee (EHSEC). It is the highest-level

management committee, with a mandate to provide executive level oversight and strategic direction for all critical health, safety and

environmental issues, including climate-related issues, as these have been identified as a critical risk in Husky’s enterprise risk matrix. This

committee consists of members of senior management (Vice-President and above), and is chaired by the Chief Operating Officer, who

holds ultimate accountability for management of, and reporting on, climate-related issues to the Board. The EHSEC maintains elements of

the enterprise risk matrix related to health, safety and environment, including climate-related risk. The enterprise risk matrix is maintained

by the Risk and Compliance Committee, which reports the matrix on a quarterly basis to the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, at

least semi-annually to the Health, Safety and Environment Committee of the Board of Directors, and annually to the Board of Directors.

Employee incentives

(C1.3) Do you provide incentives for the management of climate-related issues, including the attainment of targets?

Yes

(C1.3a) Provide further details on the incentives provided for the management of climate-related issues.

Who is entitled to benefit from

these incentives?

Types of incentives Activity incentivized Comment

All employees Monetary reward Efficiency project

Individuals nominated for HS&E

awards for major sustainability

accomplishments.

Recognition (non-monetary) Recognition for specific projects

that address climate change and

other environmental issues through

the CEO's Corporate

Responsibility awards.

C2 Risks and opportunities

Time horizons

(C2.1) Describe what your organization considers to be short-, medium- and long-term horizons.

Time horizon From (years) To (years) Comment

Short-term 0 2

Medium-term 2 5

Long-term 5 15

Management processes

(C2.2) Select the option that best describes how your organization's processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related issues are integrated into your overall risk management.

Integrated into multi-disciplinary company-wide risk identification, assessment, and management processes

(C2.2a) Select the options that best describe your organization's frequency and time horizon for identifying, and assessing climate-related risks.

Frequency of monitoring How far into the future are risks

considered?

Comment

Six-monthly or more frequently > 6 yearsHusky’s enterprise risk matrix is reviewed on a regular

basis by vice presidents and managers at all levels of the

Company and on a quarterly basis by the Executive

Health, Safety and Environment Committee, which is

composed of senior managers. Updates are provided on

a quarterly basis to the Audit Committee of the Board of

Directors, at least semi-annually to the Health, Safety

and Environment Committee of the Board of Directors,

and annually to the Board of Directors. At the asset level,

the asset managers, environmental coordinators and

other appropriate individuals are informed or consulted.

(C2.2b) Provide further details on your organization’s process(es) for identifying and assessing climate-related risks.

Husky uses a comprehensive greenhouse gas (GHG) management framework to identify and respond to climate-related risks and

opportunities. A cornerstone of the framework is the Carbon Management Critical Competency Network (CMCC), across departmental

group that convenes representatives from across Husky’s business units to share knowledge and develop guidance on carbon and climate

issues.

Process scope:

Husky’s GHG management framework manages reporting, regulatory compliance, emission forecasting and emission reduction strategies.

It includes:

- An emission management system

- Inventories and quantification

- Reporting and verification

- Forecasting

- Reduction and compliance strategies

- Regulatory advocacy and policy development

- Financial impact assessment

- Corporate governance

The CMCC also provides corporate guidance and recommendations around the growing financial risks and value of carbon, and

contributes information to the Executive Health, Safety and Environment Committee on a regular basis. This information is also

incorporated into Husky’s enterprise risk matrix, where climate-related risks are assessed alongside other critical risks to the Company.

Risks deemed to have substantive financial impact to the company (greater than $10,000,000) are highlighted for additional scrutiny.

The Carbon Management Regulatory Monitoring Committee monitors emerging regulations related to carbon, including carbon pricing,

methane regulations, and clean fuel standards. The purpose of the group is to understand the cumulative impact of these emerging

regulations, and to coordinate Husky’s advocacy strategy to promote an outcome that achieves government objectives.

(C2.2c) Which of the following risk types are considered in your organization's climate-related risk assessments?

Risk type Relevance & inclusion Please explain

Current

regulation

Relevant, always

included

Husky’s GHG management framework includes an Environmental Performance Reporting System

(EPRS) for inventory, quantification, reporting and verification of GHG emissions. The Corporate

Responsibility business unit with the Carbon Management Critical Competency Network and the Carbon

Management Regulatory Monitoring Committee use the outputs of EPRS to quantify and manage

exposure to current regulatory risk. Husky has also included carbon pricing in its long-range planning and

2018 budgeting processes. For example, Husky’s Sunrise and Tucker thermal facilities used current

Alberta carbon pricing of $30/tonne to forecast compliance obligations in 2018.

Emerging

regulation

Relevant, always

included

Husky’s GHG management framework includes an Environmental Performance Reporting System

(EPRS) for inventory, quantification, reporting and verification of GHG emissions. The Corporate

Responsibility business unit with the Carbon Management Critical Competency Network and the Carbon

Management Regulatory Monitoring Committee use the outputs of EPRS alongside of jurisdiction-specific

models to quantify, forecast and manage exposure to risks associated with emerging regulation from the

governments of Canada and the U.S. as well as in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, B.C.,

Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario, Ohio and Wisconsin. For example, Husky has evaluated the

impact of the Government of Canada’s proposed backstop carbon pricing on its Canadian operations due

to the possibility that provincial equivalency may not be achieved in some jurisdictions where Husky

operates emissions-intensive facilities.

By estimating its current and projected future emissions and understanding forthcoming regulations that

may impact its business, the Company determines the areas of its operations that may face future


compliance obligations or additional costs from regulation. Husky's enterprise risk management program

supports decision making via comprehensive and systematic identification and assessment of risks that

could materially impact the results of the Company. It builds risk management and mitigation into

strategic planning and operational processes for its business units. Husky has developed an enterprise

risk matrix to identify risks to its people, the environment, its assets and its reputation, and to

systematically mitigate these risks to an acceptable level.

Technology Relevant, always

included

Husky’s GHG Management Framework includes a process for climate-related technology assessment,

including not only new innovations that can reduce the Company’s emissions intensity, but also

innovations that could disrupt Husky’s business strategy. As new technologies are identified by subject

matter experts across the Company, they are shared through the Carbon Management Critical

Competency Network (CMCC) and as appropriate, are incorporated into regular updates to the Executive

Health, Safety and Environment Committee and business unit leadership.

Examples of risk from technological innovation that have been reviewed by the CMCC are the

accelerating development of renewable energy infrastructure and electrification of the transportation

sector. As part of its risk assessment process Husky reviewed commonly accepted forecasts of growth in

these sectors to determine the impact to its short, medium and long-term strategy. Husky employed a

Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) tool as part of a process to review technologies that might

qualify for external funding and enhance business cases for technology risk mitigation.

Legal Relevant, always

included

Husky’s Carbon Management Critical Competency Network (CMCC) includes representation from

Husky’s Legal business unit, which monitors developments in climate-related litigation that could impact

Husky’s business. As potential risks are identified, Husky evaluates its exposure to similar risks, and

adjusts corporate policies, strategies and/or practices as deemed appropriate. For example, Husky

reviewed U.S. litigation against energy companies related to their public disclosure of climate-related risk,

and as a result increased scrutiny of its public disclosure of climate-related risk and modified the

disclosure accordingly.


Market Relevant, always

included


Upstream and Downstream business units, as well as service groups including Environment, Legal,

Sustainability, Finance, Government Relations and Information Services. As climate-related risks

associated with shifts in supply and demand for commodities are identified, they are evaluated and

incorporated into regular reports to the Executive Health, Safety and Environment Committee and

business unit leadership. For example, changes in lower-carbon and clean fuels regulations across

Canada have the potential to change the market for Husky’s fuel products sold in its 558 (2017 year end)

retail locations in North America. CMCC has supported Husky’s assessment of these market risks and

ensured that knowledge has been mobilized across the organization.

Reputation Relevant, always

included


Husky’s Corporate Affairs business unit, which manages the Husky brand and reputation. Climate-related

impacts to reputation, resulting from changing consumer or community perceptions of Husky, or the

broader Canadian energy system context, are evaluated and strategies are developed and incorporated

into regular reports to the Executive Health, Safety and Environment Committee and business unit

leadership.

In 2017 the CMCC developed a formal communication plan to ensure messages regarding carbon risks

and opportunities were consistent, and to promote those messages both internally and externally across

multiple media, including web, intranet, industry associations and direct engagement with regulators.

Acute

physical

Relevant, always

included

Event-driven, acute physical climate-related risks are identified as part of the hazardous operations

planning process used by Husky. For example, Husky facilities such as well sites, pipeline infrastructure

or retail stations, which are exposed to flood risk incorporate mitigation measures as part of the design

and engineering process, as well as response measures, into their emergency response plans.


Chronic

physical

Relevant, always

included

Climate-related risks from longer-term shifts in climate patterns are incorporated into operational risk

assessments that influence production and facilities planning processes. For example, Husky employs a

water risk assessment process that highlights exposure to drought-related risk for facilities that require

access to fresh-water supply for production operations. This risk assessment process has been

incorporated into facility planning for thermal facilities relying on water from the North Saskatchewan

River basin.

Upstream Relevant, always

included

As part of its regulatory risk assessment process, Husky identifies risks that may have a disproportionate

impact on its suppliers, and works with vendors to develop mitigation measures. For example, many of

the Company’s suppliers have been impacted by the Alberta carbon levy system. Husky has worked with

its suppliers to ensure that a fair flow through of costs related to the levy are incorporated into its

agreements.

Downstream Relevant, always

included

Regulatory, political and social barriers to pipeline projects in Canada are impacting the ability of many

producers to access world commodity pricing for oil and natural gas products. These risks are

incorporated into Husky’s economic planning for future investment decisions through pricing

assumptions, forecasted apportionment availability, toll impacts and other relevant factors. Assessments

of these risks as they relate to climate issues are coordinated through the Carbon Management Critical

Competency Network and Carbon Management Regulatory Monitoring Committee as deemed relevant.

(C2.2d) Describe your process(es) for managing climate-related risks and opportunities.

Husky uses a comprehensive greenhouse gas (GHG) management framework to identify and respond to climate change risks and

opportunities. The Carbon Management Critical Competency Network (CMCC) is a cornerstone of this framework and convenes

representatives from across Husky to share knowledge and develop guidance on carbon and climate issues.

Process scope:

Husky’s GHG management framework manages reporting, regulatory compliance, emission forecasting and emission reduction strategies.

It includes:

- An emission management system

- Inventories and quantification

- Reporting and verification

- Forecasting

- Reduction strategies

- Regulatory advocacy and policy development

- Financial impact assessment

- Corporate Governance

The CMCC also provides corporate guidance and recommendations around the growing financial risks and value of carbon.

Risk Management Process:

By estimating its current and projected future emissions and understanding forthcoming regulations that may impact its business, the

Company determines the areas of its operations that may face future compliance obligations or additional costs from regulation. Husky's

enterprise risk management program supports decision-making via comprehensive and systematic identification and assessment of risks

that could materially impact the results of the Company. It builds risk management and mitigation into strategic planning and operational

processes for its business units through the adoption of standards and best practices. Husky has developed an enterprise risk matrix to

identify risks to its people, the environment, its assets and its reputation, and to systematically mitigate these risks to an acceptable level.

Husky applies its GHG management framework through the lifecycle of projects and uses general hazard assessment procedures to

evaluate opportunities and risks at an asset level. The results of assessments are then incorporated into other asset planning processes.

Example:

Recent changes to Alberta climate policy include the implementation of the Carbon Competitiveness Incentive Regulation (CCIR) as a

replacement for the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER) for facilities with large GHG emissions in the province. To fully understand

the impacts of the new regulations, Husky employed the tools of its GHG Management Framework described above to quantify and assess

the impacts, based on current and forecast emission profiles for regulated facilities. Through this process, a new compliance strategy for

each facility was developed.

Opportunity Management Process:

In 2017, Husky developed a Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC), which catalogues opportunities to use technology to reduce

emissions from operations. It compares these opportunities in terms of relative economic performance and size of reductions achievable.

The MACC facilitates knowledge transfer about these technologies amongst business units and the promotion of these technologies both

internally (e.g. executive teams) and externally.

Example:

Husky’s Corporate Water Standard mandates water risk assessments for all our operations, and the development of management plans.

As part of this process Husky evaluates risks, including availability, reliability, and the potential for extreme weather events, and develops

mitigation plans to minimize those risks. This process incorporates climate-related impacts on water risk. When evaluating water source

options for our Sunrise project, this process led to the selection of process-affected water from an adjacent company’s tailing ponds as the

primary source, reducing exposure to declining availability of other water sources and reducing potential capital and operating expenses

relating to other, more remote or less stable water sources.

Husky quantifies risks and opportunities and determines materiality based on standard economic models integrated with other aspects of

an asset or business. Prioritization is determined based on quantified impact assessment. Impact categories considered include Health and

Safety, Financial, Reputation, and Environmental.

Risk disclosure

(C2.3) Have you identified any inherent climate-related risks with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business?

Yes

(C2.3a) Provide details of risks identified with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business.

Identifier Where in the

value chain

does the risk

driver

occur?

Risk type Primary climate-

related risk

driver

Type of

financial impact

driver

Company- specific description Time

horizon

1 Direct

operations

Transition

risk

Policy and legal:

Mandates on and

regulation of

existing products

and services

Policy and legal:

Increased

operating costs

(e.g., higher

compliance costs,

increased

insurance

premiums)

Risk Description: Husky is exposed to developing climate change regulations in British Columbia, Alberta,

Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, federally in Canada and the U.S., and in Asia. To

complement the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change launched in December

2016, the federal government published a Clean Fuel Standard (CFS) Regulatory Framework in

December 2017 that aims to eliminate 30 million metric tonnes of GHG emissions by 2030 through 10-

15% reductions in fuel carbon intensities. CFS consultations are ongoing. The Canadian Federal Carbon

Pricing Backstop continued to develop in 2017. The backstop will apply to jurisdictions that do not have

carbon pricing systems that align to the federal benchmark. It is composed of a carbon levy applied to

fossil fuels and an output-based pricing system for industrial facilities that emit above 50,000 tonnes of

CO2e per year. The Canadian government will implement the backstop in whole or in part on January 1,

2019, whereas the equivalency assessment of provincial carbon pricing systems with the federal system

will be completed by the end of 2018. In October 2017, the Manitoba government set out a static carbon

price of $25 per tonne beginning in 2018. An output-based pricing system of performance standards,

offsets and credit trading will apply to large industrial emitters. In December 2017, the B.C. government

announced consultations regarding the feasibility of its carbon intensity targets, including the potential for

a 15-20% total reduction in carbon intensity of transportation fuels by 2030. The Alberta government’s

Carbon Competitiveness Incentives Regulation (CCIR) came into force on January 1, 2018 and replaced

the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation. The CCIR regulates large carbon emitters, including Husky’s

Sunrise and Tucker facilities, via an output-based allocation system. Also in December 2017, the

Saskatchewan government released its plan to develop and implement sector-specific output-based

performance standards on facilities emitting more than 25,000 tonnes of CO2e per year. Consultations

with stakeholders have been ongoing throughout 2018. In 2017, Husky paid carbon fees related to its

operations in Ontario, B.C. and Alberta.

Current

2 Direct

operations

Physical risk Acute: Other Reduced revenue

from decreased

production capacity

Risk Description: Husky operates in some of the harshest environments in the world, including the

offshore Atlantic region at the White Rose field. Climate change is expected to increase severe weather

conditions, including winds, flooding, and variable temperatures that are contributing to the melting of

northern ice and increased iceberg activity. The Company has a number of policies to protect people,

equipment, and the environment in the event of extreme weather conditions and adverse ice conditions.

Risk Effects: Icebergs and pack ice off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador may affect Husky’s

offshore facilities, causing damage to equipment and potential production disruptions, spills, asset

Current

damage and human impacts.

3 Direct

operations

Transition

risk

Market: Changing

customer behavior

Market: Reduced

demand for goods

and/or services due

to shift in consumer

preferences

Risk Description: Societal and consumer pressure to reduce GHG emissions from the transportation

sector could affect the composition of the basket of fuels available to the consumer as well as improved

vehicle performance, as noted in the Canadian Fuels Association’s “Fuels for Life” report. Risk Effects:

Increased transportation fuel prices due to carbon pricing could result in increased demand for improved

vehicle performance leading to increased fuel efficiency, which may reduce demand for gasoline and

diesel at Husky’s 558 (2017 year end) retail locations in North America

Long-term

4 Direct

operations

Physical risk Acute: Increased

severity of extreme

weather events

such as cyclones

and floods

Reduced revenue

from decreased

production capacity

Risk Description: Where Husky has operations in flood prone areas, extreme weather events can expose

the Company to increased risk of disruption to operations. Risk Effects: Flooding and extreme weather

has the potential to disrupt operations in the field as well as at Husky’s head office in Calgary. In June

2013, Calgary experienced a flood event that prevented access to the entire downtown core, including

Husky’s head office, for a week. In May of 2016, Husky shut down the Sunrise facility due to wildfires. The

project was restarted in June. At the time, Sunrise was producing about 30,000 barrels per day of

bitumen. Sunrise is 50% owned by JV partners, amounting to an approximate production loss net to

Husky of 15,000 barrels per day.

Current

Identifi

er

Likelihood Magnitu

de of

impact

Potential

financial

impact

Explanation of financial impact Management method Cost of

management

Comment

1 Virtually certain Low $8,581,951.58 Presently, Husky makes carbon-related

payments in B.C., Ontario and Alberta.

These payments totaled $8,581,951.58

in 2017. This figure was calculated by

aggregating total Ontario cap and trade

credits purchased for fuel imports,

Alberta carbon levy and Specified Gas

Emitters Regulation payments that are

not passed on to customers, and B.C.

carbon fees for the Sikanni Gas Plant

and Prince George Refinery. The

Company’s current financial exposure

to fees associated with carbon

emissions is approximately 0.05% of

Husky manages its exposure to uncertainty in new

regulation through strategic investments that focus

on positive return on investment (ROI), reduced

operating costs and lower emissions intensity.

Husky participates in direct and joint industry

engagement with policy makers to stay abreast of

emerging trends in regulation and advocate for

regulatory certainty. For example, in 2016 and 2017

as the governments of Alberta and Canada

expressed their intent to revise regulations

concerning methane emissions to meet a 45%

reduction over 2012 levels by 2025, Husky

recognized the impact of these changes on its

operations and joined as an active participant on

$1,500,000 Husky's initial pilot for CO2

capture from once-through

steam generator flue gas at its

Lashburn, Sask. test facility

began operation in 2015,

capturing up to 30 tonnes a

day of CO2e. The project cost

approximately $20 million, with

$6 million provided through

external grants. Relevant

energy efficiency projects that

help mitigate GHG regulatory

exposure are estimated at

$1,500,000 for 2017. Activities

Identifi

er

Likelihood Magnitu

de of

impact

Potential

financial

impact


management

Comment

Husky’s 2017 gross revenue before

royalties and marketing and other

income, and 3% of total Canadian

energy input costs. The Company

expects payments to increase with

pending changes to GHG regulations in

various jurisdictions, however there is

some uncertainty as to the degree and

pace at which increases will be

incurred.

the Alberta Energy Regulator’s Methane Reduction

Oversight Committee and subcommittees.

Participation has allowed Husky to develop a

positive relationship with regulators and provide

input in support of developing effective policy.

Husky continues to monitor the international and

domestic efforts to address climate change,

including developments through the UN

Conference of Parties process and emerging

regulations in the jurisdictions in which the

Company operates. Although the impact of

emerging regulations is uncertain, they may have a

material impact on the Company’s finances and

operations. Performance improvement may be

achieved through technology. Husky invests in

technology and participates in industry knowledge

sharing initiatives that will help it develop

operational improvements.

related to policy intelligence

and advocacy are part of

operating costs and are not

tracked separately.

2 Very unlikely Medium $129,000,000 The potential consequences of a severe

weather or ice related event to Husky's

offshore operations include possible

production disruptions, spills, asset

damage and human impacts. While this

is mitigated through the methods

described in this table, the potential

production disruption from a two-month

period of disconnection due to ice for

the SeaRose Floating Production,

Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel

could result in $129,000,000 in reduced

revenues. This estimate is based on

2017 average daily production numbers

of 30,000 boe (net equity share) and

2017 average gross revenue per barrel

of $71.69, as published in Husky’s 2017

Annual Report. (30,000 boe x 60 days

Husky’s Atlantic region business unit has a robust

ice management program that uses a range of

resources, including advanced detection,

monitoring and management. Ice monitoring is

facilitated through fixed-wing flight reconnaissance,

satellite imagery processing and offshore supply

vessel reconnaissance. Monitoring data is

processed in georeferenced format and drift is

predicted using established software developed by

the National Research Council and the Canadian

Ice Service. Supply vessels deflect icebergs

through towing by rope or ice net, or pushing by

water pressure through a high-velocity water jet

nozzle or propeller wash. Husky works

independently of, and jointly with, other oil and gas

operators through a common ice management

contractor. During ice season, Husky owned,

operated and/or contracted offshore facilities are

$5,600,000 The cost of the Company's ice

monitoring and management

activities was approximately

$5.6 million in 2017.

In March 2017, an iceberg

came within the SeaRose

floating, production, storage

and offloading (FPSO)

vessel‘s exclusion zone

offshore Newfoundland and

Labrador. The Company

followed its ice management

plan – shutting down

production and making

preparations to disconnect.

However, it did not take the

final step of disconnecting.

Identifi

er

Likelihood Magnitu

de of

impact

Potential

financial

impact


management

Comment

X $71.69/boe = $129,000,000) assigned ice observers, providing 24-hour

coverage. An onshore joint ice operations

coordinator is assigned to consolidate ice

information between the joint operators. Regular

ice surveillance flights usually commence in

February, and continue until throughout iceberg

season. In addition, Atlantic business unit operators

employ a series of supply and support vessels to

actively manage ice and icebergs. This fleet has

grown over time, partly in response to changing ice

conditions. Husky maintains a series of ad-hoc

relationships with contractors, providing for the

quick mobilization of additional resources as

required.

The Company has since

undertaken steps to further

strengthen its ice

management plan and to

ensure it will be followed in

any future situations. it has

improved its iceberg towing

capacity and implemented an

onshore ice management

room, providing for real-time

monitoring of operations

offshore. It has also upgraded

radar systems to automate the

transfer of ice-tracking data

from offshore installations.

3 About as likely as

notLow $3,000,000 If Husky were to experience a 2.4%

annual decrease in fuel sales,

corresponding to the EIA’s largest

estimated decline in energy demand for

any mode of transport through 2050 in

its 2018 Annual Energy Outlook, the

scale of potential financial impacts to

the Company are in the order of $3

million per year based on 2017 fuel

revenues of $139 million. This figure is

less than 0.2% of 2017 gross revenue.

The Company has growth opportunities

in enhanced oil production using CO2,

and ethanol-blended fuels.

As regulations develop and markets for its products

change, Husky will continue to manage the risk

through the Carbon Management Critical

Competency Network and its Carbon Regulatory

Monitoring Committee. Through these methods,

Husky monitors emerging regulations, advises

management and lead officers of any

developments, and advocates the Company's

position with the regulators. Additionally, Husky’s

Executive Health, Safety, and Environment

Committee reviews and approves compliance and

emission reduction strategies, establishes

performance targets, and allocates resources as

appropriate. Through the application of Husky’s

Enterprise Risk Management program over time,

the Company will seek to develop the appropriate

response to changing regulations and markets as

they materialize. This includes allocating resources

as appropriate to growth opportunities in natural

gas, enhanced oil production using CO2, and

0 Husky has integrated its

Climate Change Management

Framework into everyday

business operations at a

corporate-services level.

There are no additional

material costs to manage the

risks described in this

response at this time. If any of

these risks are determined to

be more pressing or impactful,

a reassessment of

management plans and costs

will be performed.

Identifi

er

Likelihood Magnitu

de of

impact

Potential

financial

impact


management

Comment

ethanol blended transportation fuels. As an

example of a current action to address this risk,

Husky is reducing emissions through increased

renewable fuel blending. In 2017, the use of

ethanol blended fuel helped prevent the emission of

73,000 tonnes of CO2e.

4 likely Husky’s business continuity plan and

processes resulted in no financial

losses resulting from the head office

closure during the 2013 flood.

Readiness for potential emergencies is

strengthened through exercises, established

processes and Emergency Response Plans (ERPs)

designed to guide a consistent and effective

response to any event which could affect

employees, contractors, the community, the

environment and/or the Company’s assets and

reputation. Additionally, Husky develops

contingency plans and measures to mitigate the

impacts should a business-interrupting event occur.

0 There is no additional cost of

management for this beyond

Husky’s existing Emergency

Response planning process.

Opportunity disclosure

(C2.4) Have you identified any climate-related opportunities with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business?

Yes

(C2.4a) Provide details of opportunities identified with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business.


value chain

does the

opportunity

occur?

Opportunity

type

Primary climate-

related

opportunity driver

Type of financial

impact driver

Company-specific description Time horizon

1 Direct operations Energy source Use of supportive

policy incentives

Reduced

operational costs

(e.g., through use

of lowest cost

abatement)

Opportunity Description: Husky has a number CO2 sources whose emissions may be relatively

inexpensive to capture. These sources include ethanol plants, hydrogen plants and sour gas

sweetening plants. However, presently there is no widespread infrastructure in place to transport

captured CO2 for other uses. Regulations will influence the construction and operation of CO2 capture

and transport infrastructure. Husky is operating a pilot at Lashburn, Sask., capturing up to 30 tonnes a

day of CO2e from once-through steam generators for use at EOR candidate facilities. Multiple low

emission technologies are under consideration for future application at thermal projects. Opportunity

Effects: The CO2 sources available for carbon capture will allow Husky to respond to regulatory

changes influencing carbon capture and storage and provide for reduced operating costs.

Medium-term

2 Direct operations Resilience Other Increased reliability

of supply chain and

ability to operate

under various

conditions

Opportunity Description: Husky operates in some of the harshest environments in the world. These

environments are subject to physical changes due to climate change including extreme weather

conditions and iceberg activity that could adversely affect in onshore and offshore operations. For

example, iceberg activity off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador may affect offshore oil

production facilities, including the SeaRose FPSO. The Company has developed a number of policies

to protect people, equipment, and the environment in the event of extreme weather conditions

Opportunity Effects: Husky's experience in harsh environments allows the Company to effectively

manage iceberg activity.

Current

3 Direct operations Resource

efficiency

Use of more

efficient production

and distribution

processes

Increased

production

capacity, resulting

in increased

revenues

Regulations may encourage research into the use of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery. Husky completed

a project in 2012 which included capturing CO2, injecting it into heavy oil reservoirs, and then using

the CO2 to assist with enhanced heavy oil recovery, and continues to investigate additional capture

technologies. Husky is developing this recovery method, which has not yet been applied commercially

in the thin, shallow, viscous formations typical of heavy oil. Specifically, the Company is developing

knowledge and methods on how to capture CO2 from its Lloydminster Ethanol Plant and other

Short Term


value chain

does the

opportunity

occur?

Opportunity

type

Primary climate-

related

opportunity driver

Type of financial

impact driver

Company-specific description Time horizon

sources; and then purify, dehydrate and compress it before transporting it to heavy oil reservoirs

located in proximity to the plant. The CO2 is injected into the reservoirs and used to enhance oil

recovery. When the reservoirs are fully depleted, the CO2 can be stored in the reservoir.

4 Direct operations Resource

efficiency

Use of more

efficient modes of

transport

Reduced operating

costs (e.g., through

efficiency gains and

cost reductions)

In 2017, Husky continued to use its FuelTrax Fuel Management and Monitoring system to conserve

fuel and reduce air emissions from its Atlantic operations. FuelTrax records fuel consumption from

Offshore Supply Vessels (OSVs) and is designed to measure diesel consumption per second. As a

result, Husky expects to optimize OSVs efficiency and reduce fuel consumption and emissions on

transits between port and the offshore field.

Short Term

5 Customer Markets Other: Shift in

consumer

preferences

Increased demand

for existing

products/services

Opportunity Description: Husky may have an opportunity to provide low-carbon fuels to meet new

market demand. Certain markets are assigning premium value to low-carbon transportation fuels and

coal is being phased out and replaced by natural gas as the fuel of choice for power generation. Husky

is well positioned to benefit from these trends in consumer behaviour as it has growth opportunities in

natural gas production and ethanol-blended gasoline. The Company’s Lloydminster Ethanol Plant

currently provides low carbon intensity ethanol to the B.C. market to support blending requirements to

meet the province’s Renewable and Low Carbon Fuels Requirements Regulation. Husky is also

considering options for CO2 capture and storage at its Minnedosa Ethanol Plant in Manitoba.

Opportunity Effects: Increased consumer demand for low-carbon transportation fuels and natural gas

could result in new revenue opportunities.

Medium term

Identifi

er

Likelihood Magnitude

of impact

Potential

financial

impact

Explanation of financial

impact

Strategy to realize opportunity Cost to realize

opportunity

Comment

1 Likely Low $7,000,000 Husky is performing

ongoing evaluations to

assess the financial

impact of this opportunity.

Commodity prices of CO2

Husky’s Carbon Management Critical Competency Network and

corporate carbon management experts advise business units on

potential projects for CO2 capture that could support EOR or other

markets. As part of this process, support has been provided to

submit applications for research and development funding in this

$20,000,000 Husky's initial pilot for CO2 capture

from once-through steam generator

flue gas at its Lashburn, Sask. test

facility began operation in 2015,

capturing up to 30 tonnes a day of

Identifi

er


of impact

Potential

financial

impact


impact


opportunity

Comment

for EOR purposes can

exceed $100 per tonne

when delivered to remote

sites. For example, if

CO2 can be captured at

$50 per tonne, it would

represent $7 million in

savings, based on 2017

injection volumes of CO2.

area. In addition, through participation in joint industry projects

and conferences, Husky has stayed informed on developing

technologies that could improve this feasibility of this opportunity.

Through its test facility in Lashburn, Sask., Husky is currently

implementing a CO2 capture program for an EOR pilot from once-

through steam generators to evaluate technological and economic

feasibility of large scale technology adoption and opportunity

exploitation.

CO2e. The project cost

approximately $20 million, with $6

million provided through external

grants.

2 Likely Medium $889,700,000 Husky's proven ability to

operate in the harsh

offshore environment in

the Atlantic region has

contributed to an

expectation that the

Company will recover

additional oil over time. In

2017, Husky had gross

revenues of $889.7 million

from its Atlantic

Operations.

Husky’s Atlantic business unit has a robust ice management

program that uses a range of resources, including a dedicated

surveillance aircraft, and works with various agencies including

Environment Canada, the Coast Guard and Canadian Ice Service.

Regular surveillance flights usually start in February, and continue

until the threat has abated. Husky employs a fleet of vessels to

actively manage ice threats. These vessels are equipped with ice

management tools including towing ropes, towing nets and water

cannons. This fleet has grown over time partly in response to

changing ice conditions. Husky works with contractors to mobilize

additional resources as needed. In March 2017 an iceberg came

within the SeaRose floating, production, storage and offloading

(FPSO) vessel‘s exclusion zone. The Company followed its ice

management plan – shutting down production and making

preparations to disconnect. However, it did not take the final step

of disconnecting. The Company has undertaken steps to further

strengthen the plan and to ensure it will be followed in any future

situations. It has also improved its iceberg towing capacity and

implemented an onshore ice management room, providing for

real-time monitoring of operations offshore, and upgraded radar

systems to automate the transfer of ice tracking data from

offshore installations.

$5,600,000 The cost of the Company's ice

monitoring and management

activities were approximately $5.6

million in 2017

3 Very likelyIf CO2 can be injected Husky continues to pursue EOR development as part of its $30,000,000 In 2017, total operating and capital

Identifi

er


of impact

Potential

financial

impact


impact


opportunity

Comment

successfully and used for

Enhanced Oil Recovery, it

has potential to increase

the recoverable reserves

in several heavy oil assets

over time.

broader heavy oil business strategy. In 2017, Husky operated

CO2 injection EOR pilot tests in five heavy oil pilot areas. The

impact to oil production and ultimate oil recovery is being closely

monitored. The results of these pilots will determine the

commercial feasibility of a large-scale CO2 EOR project.

expenditure in Husky’s Lloydminster

area heavy oil cyclic solvent

injection projects was $30MM.

4 Very likely Medium-low $1,000,000 Since 2015, when the

Fuel Trax system was

commissioned, Husky has

seen the average daily

fuel consumption of its

supply fleet reduced by

7%. This translates to a

savings of more than

$1,000,000 based on an

average fuel price of $690

per cubic metre.

Husky changed its offshore Atlantic fleet configuration in

2017. The Maersk Dispatcher and Atlantic Osprey were replaced

with Atlantic Kingfisher and Skandi Vinland. The Fuel Trax fuel

monitoring system is operational on two vessels, the Green Pilot

fuel monitoring system is operational on another and manual

reporting is utilized on the remaining term charter vessel. Real-

time recording of fuel burn has indicated areas where

consumption can be reduced. This has resulted in a two-year

average daily fleet fuel consumption reduction of 7%.

5 Likely The financial implications

are difficult to measure at

this time. However, these

opportunities have the

potential to inform

Husky’s investment

decisions. For example, if

consumer preference

shifts to low-carbon fuels

for transportation and

natural gas for power

generation, Husky may

allocate greater resources

to these growth areas.

Husky identifies and manages opportunities related to consumer

behaviour through several mechanisms: The Company’s

enterprise risk matrix with mitigation strategies is reviewed by the

Audit Committee quarterly and provided to the Board of Directors

annually. Through the application of this risk matrix over time, the

Company will be able to determine the appropriate response to

changing markets as they develop. This includes allocating

resources as appropriate to growth opportunities in natural gas,

and ethanol-blended gasoline. For example, the Company’s

Lloydminster Ethanol Plant currently provides low-carbon intensity

ethanol to the B.C. market.

$0 Husky has integrated its risk and

opportunity identification processes

into everyday business operations

at a corporate services level. There

are no additional material costs to

identify and manage the

opportunities described in this

response at this time. If any of these

opportunities are determined to

warrant further study, a formal

project sanctioning process would

follow with the appropriate decision

gates as needed. Costs would be

refined at each of these gates.

Business impact assessment

(C2.5) Describe where and how the identified risks and opportunities have impacted your business.

Area Impact Description

Products and

services

Impacted for some

suppliers, facilities, or

product lines

Current and emerging clean and renewable fuels regulations have affected costs and

markets for blended fuels in Husky’s Downstream business. Husky has opportunities

related to ethanol produced with lower carbon intensities than specified by

regulations due to its CO2 capture facility at its Lloydminster Ethanol Plant. Currently,

these regulations are not having a substantive impact on ethanol revenues, but

changes in the market for low carbon intensity fuels could increase impact.

Supply chain

and/or value chain

Impacted for some

suppliers, facilities, or

product lines

Many of Husky’s suppliers have been impacted by the Alberta carbon levy system.

Husky has worked with its suppliers to ensure that a fair flow-through of costs related

to the levy are incorporated into its agreements. To date, impacts have not been

substantive.

Adaptation and

mitigation activities

Impacted Husky’s Atlantic business unit has a robust ice management program. The program

uses a range of resources, including a dedicated ice surveillance aircraft, and works

with government agencies including Environment Canada, the Coast Guard and

Canadian Ice Service. Regular ice surveillance flights usually commence in February,

and continue until the threat has abated. Atlantic region operators employ a series of

supply and support vessels to actively manage ice and icebergs. These vessels are

Area Impact Description

equipped with a variety of ice management tools including towing ropes, towing nets

and water cannons. This fleet has grown over time partly in response to changing ice

conditions. Husky maintains a series of ad-hoc relationships with contractors,

allowing for the quick mobilization of additional resources as required. The cost of the

Company's ice monitoring and management activities were approximately $5.6

million in 2017.

Investment in R&D Impacted As part of its efforts to improve the efficiency of getting its bitumen products to

market, Husky has proposed a substantive investment in the HDR diluent reduction

process that provides for significantly reduced diluent use in transmission pipelines.

Operations Impacted Presently, Husky makes non-substantive carbon-related payments in B.C., Ontario

and Alberta. These payments totaled $8,581,951.58 in 2017. This figure was

calculated by aggregating total Ontario cap and trade credits purchased for fuel

imports, Alberta carbon levy and Specified Gas Emitters Regulation payments that

are not passed on to customers and B.C. carbon fees for the Sikanni Gas Plant and

Prince George Refinery. The Company’s current financial exposure to fees

associated with carbon emissions is approximately 0.05% of Husky’s 2017 gross

revenue before royalties and marketing and other income, and 3% of total Canadian

energy input costs. The Company expects payments to increase with pending

changes to GHG regulations in various jurisdictions, however there is some

uncertainty as to the degree and pace at which increases will be incurred.

Financial planning assessment

(C2.6) Describe where and how the identified risks and opportunities have factored into your financial planning process.

Area Relevance Description

Revenues Impacted for some suppliers,

facilities, or product lines

Husky participates in clean and renewable fuels programs in the U.S. and

Canada. These programs mandate blending of renewable fuels into marketed

fuels at various percentages, depending on jurisdiction. Markets for blendstocks

or other compliance options can be volatile, and financial planning for

compliance is an important part of mitigating these potentially substantive costs,

particularly if Husky is unable to pass these costs on to customers.

Operating costs Impacted for some suppliers,


Presently, Husky makes non-substantive carbon-related payments in B.C.,

Ontario and Alberta. These payments totaled $8,581,951.58 in 2017. The

Carbon Management Regulatory Monitoring Committee monitors current and

emerging regulations and advises management of potential adverse impacts to

the Company’s financial position and results of operations. The Company’s

current financial exposure to fees associated with carbon emissions is

approximately 0.05% of Husky’s 2017 gross revenue before royalties and

marketing and other income, and 3% of total Canadian energy input costs. The

Company expects payments to increase with pending changes to GHG

regulations in various jurisdictions, however there is some uncertainty as to the

degree and pace at which increases will be incurred.


Capital

expenditures/capi

tal allocation

Impacted for some suppliers,


In making investment decisions, Husky considers both the cost and value of

carbon. Project carbon costs are modelled based on current and emerging

policies in any given jurisdiction. Regulatory focus on methane venting

management in heavy oil operations has in part led to non-substantive

investment in gas conservation infrastructure. In 2017, Husky invested

approximately $1,500,000 in gas compression to capture otherwise vented

gases at heavy oil well sites, resulting in an estimated annual savings of greater

than $3,100,000.

Acquisitions and

divestments

Impacted for some suppliers,


Husky recently completed a disposition program of legacy assets in Western

Canada. Part of the process used to evaluate candidate assets for sale was

exposure to regulatory risk. This program had a substantive impact on Husky’s

balance sheet. Altogether, approximately 52,000 boe/day of legacy assets have

been sold since late 2015.

Access to capital Impacted for some suppliers,


Investments in low emission technology and energy efficiency often require

additional policy incentives including R&D support funding provided by provincial

and federal agencies to meet Husky’s internal capital allocation criteria. Husky’s

HDR diluent reduction technology has been awarded substantive financial

support through federal R&D funding programs.

Assets Impacted for some suppliers,


Operating costs associated with developing reserves are factored into reserves

valuation. These costs can have potentially substantive impacts and can be


affected by market, regulatory and technical risks. In 2017, Husky’s natural gas

proved reserves were reduced by 9 bcf due to economic factors.

Regulations aimed at reducing emissions intensity of production can impact

current valuation of assets in relation to their emission intensity.

Liabilities Impacted for some suppliers,


Asset retirement planning can be impacted substantively by increased regulatory

focus on venting from abandoned wells. While it is not anticipated that this would

impact the total cost of retirement, it can affect the prioritization of projects for

remediation and reclamation. In 2017, Husky’s estimated total asset retirement

obligation was $9.7 billion.

C3 Business strategy

Business strategy

(C3.1) Are climate-related issues integrated into your business strategy?

Yes

(C3.1a) Does your organization use climate-related scenario analysis to inform your business strategy?

Yes, qualitative

(C-CH3.1b/C-OG3.1b) Indicate whether your organization has developed a low-carbon transition plan to support the long-term business strategy.

No, we do not have a low-carbon transition plan

(C3.1c) Explain how climate-related issues are integrated into your business objectives and strategy.

i) Description of Internal Process for strategic GHG management:

Husky uses a GHG management framework to guide the process of integrating climate change into its business strategy. Elements of the GHG management framework that inform corporate business strategy include:

a. GHG Inventory and Quantification – Internal processes have been developed to collect and validate data for each Company business unit. Calculation methodologies follow federal, provincial and/or state guidelines for quantifying and reporting emissions using Husky’s Environmental Performance Reporting System (EPRS). The Corporate Responsibility business unit (“Corporate Responsibility”) communicates information requests and calculation results to business units annually.

b. GHG Reporting and Verification – Facilities with regulatory reporting and compliance obligations require more detailed communications plans. Corporate Responsibility, along with third-party verifiers as required, develop schedules for meetings, site visits and data validation requests. Results of third-party verification exercises are shared with the facilities to ensure continued awareness of data quality and to streamline reporting processes. Internal Audits are used to ensure completeness and accuracy of the GHG estimation and reporting systems. Facility managers approve GHG reports prior to their submission to regulatory agencies.

c. Emissions Reduction Strategy – Facilities with established emission reduction targets (Tucker and Sunrise) are evaluated in conjunction with annual reporting. Opportunities for reductions are proposed and evaluated for feasibility. Any efficiency projects implemented during the previous year are evaluated for effectiveness. Emission forecasts based on projected production provide economic support that may be used to influence future facility design specifications or justify funding for projects to reduce emissions.

d. Regulatory Policy System – Corporate Responsibility is actively involved in organizations such as the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), Canadian Fuels Association (CFA), Plains CO2 Reduction (PCOR) Partnership, International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), IPIECA and Petroleum Technology Alliance of Canada (PTAC) to collaborate with industry peers to address issues related to climate change. Issues affecting Husky’s business units are communicated through appropriate means.

ii) Examples and description of aspects of climate change that influence business strategy:

During times of policy change, additional resources are strategically allocated as needed to proactively address regulatory compliance and uncertainty.

As part of its efforts to address regulatory change and stakeholder expectations in relation to climate change, Husky strives to reduce facility emissions through improving energy efficiency, minimizing fugitive emissions and mitigating flaring and venting. Emission reduction and energy efficiency opportunities are evaluated at the facility level. These projects enable Husky to manage emissions reduction obligations and aid in meeting facility intensity targets at its Tucker and Sunrise thermal facilities. Husky pursues offsets as a means to reduce emissions at facilities where GHG reductions are not regulated.

Husky evaluates various ways to reduce the carbon intensity of its Upstream and Downstream operations. The Company uses a Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) to catalogue options, including the size of emissions reduction possible, as well economic performance. This provides for resource priortization and reductions at the most efficient cost per-tonne of CO2e. The MACC also helps different areas of the Company share information about emission reduction options.

iii) Example of the most substantial business decision made related to climate change:

The most substantial business decision that Husky has made related to climate change continues to be investment in its CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery program, driven in part by climate-related regulatory changes. Husky’s CO2 EOR program utilizes CO2 emissions captured at the Lloydminster Ethanol Plant, and the Pikes Peak South (formerly Lashburn) thermal project. This program lowers emissions intensity in the Company’s heavy oil business through carbon capture, while enhancing oil production, and creates opportunities for marketing lower carbon intensity products.

(C3.1d) Provide details of your organization’s use of climate-related scenario analysis.

Climate-related scenarios Details

Nationally determined Husky has evaluated its operations in relation to emerging regulations that are based on international

commitments. As part of its long-range planning process, the Company developed scenarios based on

contributions (NDCs) the assumed cost of carbon required to meet Canada’s Nationally Determined Contributions and tested

development projects for sensitivity to these prices in the short to medium-term time horizons. These

time horizons were chosen based on established guidelines for reserves evaluation. This process was

applied to Husky’s Upstream and Downstream Canadian Operations.

Results of this analysis were reported to senior management and the Board of Directors and factored

into investment decisions.

C4 Targets and performance

Targets

(C4.1) Did you have an emissions target that was active in the reporting year?

Intensity target

(C4.1b) Provide details of your emissions intensity target(s) and progress made against those target(s).

Target reference

number

Scope % emissions in

Scope

% reduction from

baseline year

Metric Base year Start year

Scope 1 4.67% 20

Metric tonnes

CO2e per unit of 2013 2013

Int1 production

Normalized

baseline

year

emissions

covered by

target

(metric

tons CO2e)

Target

year

Is this a

science-based

target?

%

achieved

(emission

s)

Target

status

Please explain % change

anticipate

d in

absolute

Scope 1+2

emissions

% change

anticipated

in absolute

Scope 3

emissions

0.97 2017 No, and Husky

does not

anticipate setting

one in the next

two years

100 Underway Husky exceeded this target for it’s Tucker

thermal facility through on-site steam

optimization efforts.

The baseline emissions intensity (BEI) of the

facility is 0.9668 tonnes CO2e per m3 of

bitumen produced. The 2017 net emissions

intensity limit was 80% of its baseline

emissions intensity which amounts to 0.7734

tCO2e/m3 (the target). The facility had a

Total Annual Emissions Intensity of

0.581605 tCO2e/m3 in 2017, exceeding the

target by 99%.

A rolling baseline target is used, so the

average of 2011, 2012 and 2013 production

was used to calculate baseline absolute

emissions. The target outlined is an external

target set by regulators and covers Scope 1

92% 0

emissions only. In Husky’s 2017 CDP

Climate Response, this target was

referenced as target Int2.

The figure used in the “% change anticipated

in absolute Scope 1+2 emissions” column is

based on the anticipated change in absolute

emissions that would have been observed if

the target was 100% met, based on 2017

production numbers. By exceeding the

target, Husky saved 243,844 tCO2e of

absolute emissions.

Other climate-related targets

(C4.2) Provide details of other key climate-related targets not already reported in question C4.1/a/b.

Target KPI – Metric

numerator

KPI – Metric

denominator

(intensity targets

only)

Base year Start year Target year

Methane reduction

target

40-45% of 2012

methane emissions

expressed in tonnes

CO2e

n/a 2012 2016 2025

KPI in

baseline

year

KPI in target

year

% achieved

in reporting

year

Target

Status

Please explain Part of

emissions

target

Is this target part of an

overarching initiative?

UnderwayHusky is aligning with national and

provincial plans to reduce methane

emissions by 40-45% of 2012 levels by

2025 as part of its general compliance

strategy. In 2017, Husky’s methane

emissions were 2,289,000 tonnes CO2

equivalent.

No, it's not part of an

overarching initiative

Emissions reduction initiatives

(C4.3) Did you have emissions reduction initiatives that were active within the reporting year? Note that this can include those in the planning and/or implementation phases.

Yes

(C4.3a) Identify the total number of projects at each stage of development, and for those in the implementation stages, the estimated CO2e savings.

Stage of development Number of projects Total estimated annual CO2e savings in

metric tons CO2e (only for rows marked *)

Under investigation 17

To be implemented* 1 200

Implementation commenced*1 200

Implemented* 1 627,000

Not to be implemented 0

(C4.3b) Provide details on the initiatives implemented in the reporting year in the table below.

Activity type Description of activity Estimated annual CO2e

savings (metric tons

CO2e)

Scope Voluntary/ Mandatory

Fugitive emissions Oil/natural gas methane 627,000 Scope 1 Mandatory

reductions leak capture/prevention

Annual monetary savings

(unit currency, as

specified in C0.4)

Investment required (unit

currency, as specified in

C0.4)

Payback period Estimated lifetime of the

initiative

Comment

$ 3,166,459 $1,501,668 <1 year 3-5 years

Installation of compressors

at heavy oil well sites that

will capture otherwise

vented produced gas

(C4.3c) What methods do you use to drive investment in emissions reduction activities?

Method Comment

• Compliance with regulatory requirements/standards

• Dedicated budget for energy efficiency

• Employee engagement

• Financial optimization calculations

• Internal price on carbon

• Internal incentives/recognition programs

• Partnering with governments on technology development

Low-carbon products

(C4.5) Do you classify any of your existing goods and/or services as low-carbon products or do they enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions?

Yes

(C4.5a) Provide details of your products and/or services that you classify as low-carbon products or that enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions.

Level of

aggregation

Description of

product/ Group

of products

Are these low-

carbon

product(s) or do

they enable

avoided

emissions?

Taxonomy, project,

or methodology

used to classify

product(s) as low-

carbon or to

calculate avoided

emissions

% revenue from

low-carbon

product(s) in

the reporting

year

Comment

Product Ethanol Low carbon

product

Other: Natural

Resources Canada’s

GHGenius model

1 Husky has 33 currently approved carbon

intensities registered with the B.C. Ministry of

Energy and Mines using the GHGenius model

to calculate carbon intensities.

Group of

products

Gasoline and

diesel blends

with renewable

Avoided

emissions

Other: Natural

Resources Canada’s

GHGenius model

8.27 Scope 1 GHG emissions from transportation

fuel combustion were avoided by blending

fuels renewable alternatives to gasoline (ethanol) and

renewable alternatives to diesel

(Hydrogenation-Derived Renewable Diesel

[HDRD] and biodiesel) into gasoline and diesel,

respectively. Where possible, Husky blends up

to 10% ethanol into all grades of gasoline. In

2017, this equated to an average 9.6% ethanol

blend, which exceeded federal and provincial

requirements at the point of blending (Canada

Federal - 5%, BC - 5%, AB - 5%, SK - 7.5%,

MB - 8.5%, ON - 5%). In 2017 the blending of

ethanol into gasoline resulted in a reduction of

73,138 metric tonnes of CO2 relative to the

2007 baseline. (2007 is the Government of

Canada baseline year that takes into account all

industry emissions and the fuel offering of that

year; it is integrated into the GHG model

assumptions.) The most up-to-date version of

National Resources Canada's (NRCan)

GHGenius model was used to calculate the

carbon intensities of Husky's fuel blends. The

B.C. Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel

Requirements Regulation's Emissions

Calculation was used to determine emissions

reductions. Emissions Reduction (tonnes) = (CI

class x EER fuel - CI fuel) x EC fuel / 1,000,000,

where CI class = the prescribed carbon intensity

limit for the compliance period for the class of

fuel of which the fuel is a part; EER fuel = the

prescribed energy effectiveness ratio for that

fuel in that class of fuel; CI fuel = the carbon

intensity of the fuel (via GHGenius); EC fuel =

the energy content of the fuel calculated in

accordance with the regulations. Husky is not

considering generating Certified Emission

Reductions (CERs) or Emission Reduction

Units (ERUs) within the framework of Clean

Development Mechanism (CDM) or Joint

Implementation (JI) of the United Nations

Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC) at this time.

For biodiesel and HDRD, the 2017 blend

resulted in an average of 2.8% renewables for

our Canadian supply of diesel to the market.

In 2017, the blending of biodiesel and HDRD

resulted in a reduction of 63,144 metric tonnes

of CO2 relative to the 2007 baseline.

Total emissions avoided through biofuel

blending amounted to 136,281 metric tonnes of

CO2 in 2017.

Methane reduction efforts

(C-OG4.6) Describe your organization’s efforts to reduce methane emissions from oil and gas production activities.

Husky continues engagement with regulators in order to contribute to the development of voluntary and mandatory methane emission

reduction programs to meet federal and provincial targets.

Husky has worked towards reducing methane emissions as per the following items.

- Increased understanding and focus on gas production (calculated via GOR) and the implications on emissions.

- Increased understanding and focus on gas management strategies.

- Developing new ways to reduce vent besides conventional conservation (pipeline and compressor).

- Added enclosed combustors as gas management reduction tool. No significant impact to date, but step-change reductions are

anticipated once regulators simplify reduced spacing process.

- Developing processes and tools to help focus on proactive/leading indicators to resolve potential vent issues before they become a

regulatory concern.

In 2017, Husky installed compressors at heavy oil well sites that will capture otherwise vented produced gas, generating an estimated

savings of more than 627,000 tonnes CO2e.

Leak detection and repair

(C-OG4.7) Does your organization conduct leak detection and repair (LDAR) or use other methods to find and fix fugitive methane emissions from oil and gas production activities?

Yes

(C-OG4.7a) Describe the protocol through which methane leak detection and repair or other leak detection methods, are conducted for oil and gas production activities, including predominant frequency of inspections, estimates of assets covered, and methodologies employed.

Husky meets or exceeds regulatory compliance requirements for monitoring and reporting to effectively address risk. Prescriptive programs

are in place at Company facilities for leak detection and repair of fugitive emission sources. Alberta, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia

regulations prioritize targeted facilities that are generally defined by licence type, size, throughput, or qualitative observations. Monitoring

frequencies are generally flexible and variable with an annual baseline frequency. Methodologies used included infrared cameras, hand

held gas detectors, soapy water investigations on point sources, toxic/organic vapour analyzers, photo ionization detector, ultrasound

probe, or third-party evaluation or other justifiable and defendable methods.

For example, Husky’s LDAR program at its Canadian Downstream facilities includes the survey of the natural gas and refinery fuel gas

lines to identify leaking equipment components, repair the leaks, re-monitor the repaired leak sources, and quantify and report fugitive

methane emissions from equipment leaks. Husky conducts semi-annual LDAR surveys of Its Lloydminster thermal assets. These surveys

utilize infrared and ultrasonic detection to identify leaks in real time. Maintenance personnel accompany leak detection staff to perform

repairs as leaks are discovered, wherever possible.

Flaring reduction efforts

(C-OG4.8) If flaring is relevant to your oil and gas production activities, describe your organization’s efforts to reduce flaring, including any flaring reduction targets.

Regulations in Alberta and Saskatchewan mandate both operational and economic evaluations that prioritize collection and conservation of

produced gas over flaring. In addition, Husky engages in voluntary and collaborative efforts with government and industry organizations to

reduce flaring through application of technology and sharing of knowledge and experience. Husky is also piloting closed combustors as an

alternative to flaring, providing for a more controlled combustion of waste gases where gas conservation is not a viable solution. In Husky’s

Atlantic region business unit, Husky proposes targets for flaring volumes with the regulator and is then required to stay within those limits.

These targets are approved for the period beginning April 1 and ending March 31 of the following year. For 2016-2017, the approved flare

limit was 63.46 million m3 and Husky flared approximately 57.3 million m3, staying 9.7% below the target.

C5 Emissions methodology

Base year emissions

(C5.1) Provide your base year and base year emissions (Scopes 1 and 2).

Scope Base year start Base year end Base year emissions

(metric tons CO2e)

Comment

Scope 1 01/01/2011 31/12/2011 9,750,000Due to significant

divestitures and

acquisitions during 2016

and 2017, Husky is

adjusting its baseline

emissions to reflect the

changed asset mix.

Scope 2 (location-based) 01/01/2011 31/12/2011 1,940,000 Due to significant

divestitures and

acquisitions during 2016

and 2017, Husky is

adjusting its baseline

emissions to reflect the

changed asset mix.

Scope 2 (market-based) Per CDP guidance, the

location-based result has

been used as a proxy since

a market-based figure

cannot be calculated.

Emissions methodology

(C5.2) Select the name of the standard, protocol, or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.

• Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 2003

• IPIECA's Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions, 2003

• ISO 14064-1

• The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition)

• US EPA Climate Leaders: Indirect Emissions from Purchases/ Sales of Electricity and Steam

• US EPA Climate Leaders: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion

• US EPA Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule

• Other, please specify

(C5.2a) Provide details of the standard, protocol, or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.

Question dependencies

This question only appears if you select “Other, please specify” in response to C5.2.

Environment and Climate Change Canada: Technical Guidance on Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions – 2017 Data - Facility

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting (March 2018); Western Climate Initiative: Quantification Method 2013 Addendum to Canadian

Harmonization Version (December 20, 2013); Western Climate Initiative: Final Essential Requirements of Mandatory Reporting - 2011

Amendments for Harmonization of Reporting in Canadian Jurisdictions (December 21, 2011, as amended on February 10, 2012); and

Western Climate Initiative: Final Essential Requirements of Mandatory Reporting - 2010 Amended for Canadian Harmonization (December

17, 2010).

C6 Emissions data

Scope 1 emissions data

(C6.1) What were your organization’s gross global Scope 1 emissions in metric tons CO2e?

Gross global Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e) Comment

11,180,000

Scope 2 emissions reporting

(C6.2) Describe your organization's approach to reporting Scope 2 emissions.

Scope 2, location-based Scope 2, market-based Comment

We are reporting a Scope 2, location-based

figure

We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure Husky uses green-e residual mix emissions

factors for the regions where it has operations

that acquire and consume electricity to report a

Scope 2, market based figure, per CDP

guidance. These factors are significantly lower

than the emissions factors generated from

National Inventory Reporting and local

electricity system operator data used to report

location based Scope 2 emissions, due to their

large regional coverage.


(C6.3) What were your organization's gross global Scope 2 emissions in metric tons CO2e?

Scope 2, location-based Scope 2, market-based (if applicable) Comment

2,221,000 1,311,000 Electricity emissions factors for location-based Scope 2 accounting are taken from the 2016 Canadian National Inventory Report as submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change or supplied by grid operators where available. Market-based figures are calculated using green-e residual mix electricity emission factors as recommended by CDP. Husky has a power purchase agreement in place for its Rainbow Lake gas plant. The source specific emission factor was not available for 2017 due to plant maintenance activities, so the default regional emissions factors were used.

Exclusions

(C6.4) Are there any sources (e.g. facilities, specific GHGs, activities, geographies, etc.) of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure?

Yes

(C6.4a) Provide details of the sources of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure.

Source Relevance of Scope

1 emissions from

this source

Relevance of

location-based

Scope 2 emissions

from this source

Relevance of

market-based

Scope 2 emissions

from this source (if

applicable)

Explain why this source is excluded

Drilling and Completions

Emissions from areas

where not mandated.

Emissions are not

relevant

Emissions are not

relevant

Emissions are not

relevant

Drilling and completions operations

emissions are only estimated and reported in

jurisdictions where mandated. Drilling and

completions emissions from Husky’s Atlantic

region offshore drilling operations are

included.

Emissions from Husky

owned and operated

vehicles that are operated

outside of specific large-

emitting facilities

Emissions are not

relevant

Emissions are not

relevant

Emissions are not

relevant

Husky estimates that this is not a major

emissions source at this time.

Emissions from some

Husky-owned

transportation fuels retail

sites, i.e. bulk plants, travel

centres, cardlocks and

retail stations

Emissions are not

relevant

Emissions are not

relevant

Emissions are not

relevant

Husky includes retail site Scope 2 emissions

data where available (primarily in Alberta

and Saskatchewan). Based on sampling of

those retail sites with available emissions

data, Husky estimates that emissions from

building heating and electricity consumption

from sites where data is unavailable are

immaterial when compared to the

Company’s total Scope 1 and Scope 2

emissions.

Scope 2 emissions related

to November 2017

acquisition of Superior

Refinery

No emissions

excluded

Emissions excluded

due to a recent

acquisition

Emissions excluded

due to a recent

acquisition

In November 2017, Husky acquired the

Superior Refinery. Due to the timing of this

acquisition, scope 2 emissions estimates are

not available at the time of this disclosure.


(C6.5) Account for your organization’s Scope 3 emissions, disclosing and explaining any exclusions.

Sources of

Scope 3

emissions

Evaluation

status

Metric tons CO2e Emissions calculation

methodology

Percentage of

emissions calculated

using data obtained

from suppliers or

value chain partners

Explanation

Purchased goods

and services

Not relevant,

explanation

provided

This source of Scope 3 GHG

emissions is not material when

compared against the emissions

related to the end-use combustion

and / or oxidation of the products sold

by Husky.


Sources of

Scope 3

emissions

Evaluation

status


methodology

Percentage of


using data obtained

from suppliers or


Explanation

Capital goods

Not relevant,

explanation

provided





by Husky.

Fuel-and-energy-

related activities

(not included in

Scope 1 or 2)

Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Upstream

transportation

and distribution

Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Waste generated Not relevant, This source of Scope 3 GHG


Sources of

Scope 3

emissions

Evaluation

status


methodology

Percentage of


using data obtained

from suppliers or


Explanation

in operations explanation

provided




by Husky.

Business travel Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Employee

commuting

Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Upstream leased

assets

Not relevant,

explanation

provided




Sources of

Scope 3

emissions

Evaluation

status


methodology

Percentage of


using data obtained

from suppliers or


Explanation



by Husky.

Downstream

transportation

and distribution

Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Processing of

sold products

Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Use of sold

productsRelevant,

calculated30,906,000

Emission factors are

from EPA 40 CFR part 0

Data is only provided where there is a

regulatory requirement to disclose end

use of sold product emissions. This

Sources of

Scope 3

emissions

Evaluation

status


methodology

Percentage of


using data obtained

from suppliers or


Explanation

98 subpart MM

regulation.

includes only Husky’s Downstream

assets in the U.S.

End of life

treatment of sold

products

Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Downstream

leased assets

Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Franchises Not relevant,

explanation

provided






Sources of

Scope 3

emissions

Evaluation

status


methodology

Percentage of


using data obtained

from suppliers or


Explanation

by Husky.

Investments Not relevant,

explanation

provided






by Husky.

Emissions from biologically sequestered carbon

(C6.7) Are carbon dioxide emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization?

Yes

(C6.7a) Provide the emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization in metric tons CO2.

221,000

Emissions intensities

(C6.10) Describe your gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions for the reporting year in metric tons CO2e per unit currency total revenue and provide any additional intensity metrics that are appropriate to your business operations.

Intensity

figure

Metric

numerator

(Gross

global

combined

Scope 1 and

2 emissions)

Metric

denominator

Metric

denominator:

Unit total

Scope 2

figure used

% change

from

previous

year

Direction of

change

Reason for change

0.000721 13,401,000 Unit total revenue 18,583,000,000 Location-

based

30.7% Decreased The oil price environment

significantly improved in 2017,

leading to improved revenues,

alongside increased

production and throughput.

Gross global combined S1 and

S2 emissions increased

slightly in 2017, primarily due

to increased thermal

production and refining

throughput, better fugitive

emissions data quality, and the

acquisition of the Superior

Refinery. This was offset by a

combination of changes in

output, asset dispositions,

refinement of emissions

estimation methodologies

based on improved engine

fleet data, and methane

venting reduction programs in

Western Canada, resulting in a

greater proportional change in

revenue.

Emissions intensities: Oil and gas

(C-OG6.12) Provide the intensity figures for Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e) per unit of hydrocarbon category.

Unit of hydrocarbon

category

(denominator)

Metric tons CO2e

from hydrocarbon

category per unit

specified

% change from

previous year

Direction of change Reason for change Comment

Thousand barrels of

crude oil /

condensate

71.71 18 Decreased Investment in gas

conservation

infrastructure, natural

production declines,

divestment

Thousand barrels of 85.13 3 Increased Facilities that

oil sands (includes

bitumen and synthetic

crude)

commenced

operations midway

during the 2016 year

are continuing to

normalize steam

operations towards

steady operating

conditions.

Million cubic feet of

natural gas

2.95 47 Decreased Divestment

Thousand barrels of

refinery throughput

28.90 8 Increased Acquisition of the

Superior Refinery and

increased throughput

at the Lima Refinery.

(C-OG6.13) Report your methane emissions as percentages of natural gas and hydrocarbon production or throughput.

Oil and gas business division Estimated total methane emitted

expressed as % of natural gas

production or throughput at

given division

Estimated total methane emitted

expressed as % of total

hydrocarbon production or

throughput at given division

Comment

Upstream 2.63%

0.301%

Downstream 0% 0.034% Husky classifies all gas assets as

upstream.

C7 Emissions breakdown

Scope 1 breakdown: GHGs

(C7.1) Does your organization have greenhouse gas emissions other than carbon dioxide?

Yes

(C7.1a) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by greenhouse gas type and provide the source of each used global warming potential (GWP).

Greenhouse gas Scope 1 emissions (metric tons in CO2e) GWP Reference

CO2 8,649,000 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 - 100

year)

CH4 2,289,000 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 - 100

year)

N2O 242,000 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 - 100

year)

(C-OG7.1b) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions from oil and gas value chain production activities by greenhouse gas type.

Emissions category Gross Scope 1 CO2

emissions (metric tons

CO2)

Gross Scope 1 methane


CH4)

Total gross Scope 1 GHG


CO2e)

Comment

Fugitives (Oil: Total) 333,000 81,000 2,364,000

Fugitives (Oil: Venting) 158,000 75,000 2,040,000

Fugitives (Oil: Flaring) 176,000 1,200 206,000

Fugitives (Oil: E&P, 14 4,700 118,000



CO2)



CH4)



CO2e)

Comment

excluding venting and

flaring)

Fugitives (Oil: All other) 0 0 0

Fugitives (Gas: Total) 15,000 3,700 107,000

Fugitives (Gas: Venting) 680 790 20,000

Fugitives (Gas: Flaring) 14,000 79 16,000

Fugitives (Gas: E&P,

excluding venting and

flaring)

85 2,800 70,000

Fugitives (Gas: Midstream) 0 0 0



CO2)



CH4)



CO2e)

Comment

Fugitives (Gas: All other) 0 0 0

Combustion (Oil:

Upstream, excluding

flaring)

4,683,000 1,3004,732,000

Combustion (Gas:

Upstream, excluding

flaring)

345,000 1,200 378,000

Combustion (Refining) 1,916,000 290 2,075,000

Combustion (Chemicals

production)112,000 2 113,000

Combustion (Electricity

generation)243,000 17 255,000



CO2)



CH4)



CO2e)

Comment

Combustion (Other) 0 0 0

Process emissions 456,000 1,300 545,000

Emissions not elsewhere

classified546,000 2,600 611,000

Scope 1 breakdown: country

(C7.2) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by country/region.

Country/Region Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)

Canada 9,232,000

United States of America 1,948,000

Scope 1 breakdown: business breakdown

(C7.3) Indicate which gross global Scope 1 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide.

• By business division

• By facility

• By activity (not applicable for companies responding to sector questionnaires

(C7.3a) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business division.

Business division Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)

Upstream 7,837,000

Downstream 3,343,000

(C7.3b) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business facility.

Facility Scope 1 emissions (metric

tons CO2e)

Latitude Longitude

Sunrise Energy Project 1,580,000 57.24150 -111.06000

Lima Refinery 1,428,000 40.72132 -84.11410

Lloydminster Upgrader 1,041,000 53.26300 -109.94900


tons CO2e)

Latitude Longitude

Tucker Thermal Project 740,000 54.34270 -110.32900

Superior Refinery 520,000 46.69055 -92.07095

Bolney Lloyd Thermal Project 499,000 53.52700 -109.35700

Sea Rose FPSO 418,000 46.72150 -48.13410

Pikes Peak South Lloyd Thermal Project 270,000 53.21062 -109.36700

Edam East Lloyd Thermal Project 256,000 53.15615 -108.92100

Vawn Lloyd Thermal Project 237,000 53.11599 -108.64100

Rush Lake Lloyd Thermal Project 226,000 53.11350 -108.99600

Pikes Peak Lloyd Thermal Project 220,000 53.27960 -109.37200

Prince George Refinery 144,000 53.92680 -122.70300

Paradise Hill Lloyd Thermal Project 124,000 53.60230 -109.44800

Edam West Lloyd Thermal Project 118,000 53.15613 -108.92063

Sandall Lloyd Thermal Project 115,000 53.40071 -109.43700

Rainbow Lake Gas Plant 96,000 58.45067 -119.23800


tons CO2e)

Latitude Longitude

Lloydminster Refinery 89,000 53.28850 -110.01800

Minnedosa Ethanol Plant 77,000 50.25430 -99.84980

All other Husky Operated Facilities 2,982,000

(C7.3c) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business activity.

Activity Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)

Canadian Refining and Upgrading 1,282,000

Conventional Oil 2,520,000

Drilling and Completions 29,000

Ethanol Production 113,000

Gas Production, Gathering and Processing 486,000

Offshore Oil Production 418,000

Thermal Oil Production 4,384,000

US Refining 1,948,000

Scope 1 breakdown: sector production activities

(C-CH7.4/ C-OG7.4) Break down your organization’s total gross global Scope 1 emissions by sector production activity in metric tons CO2e.

Sector production activity Gross Scope 1 emissions,

metric tons CO2e

Comment

Chemicals production activities** 113,000

Oil and gas production activities

(upstream)**7,837,000


(downstream)**

3,230,000

*This column only appears for cement production activities

**This row only appears for the relevant sector

Scope 2 breakdown: country

(C7.5) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by country/region.

.

Country/Region Scope 2, location-based

(metric tons CO2e)

Scope 2, market-based

(metric tons CO2e)

Purchased and

consumed electricity,

heat, steam or cooling

Purchased and

consumed low-carbon

electricity, heat, steam or

(MWh) cooling accounted in

market-based approach

(MWh)

Canada 1,593,000 821,000 2,991,000 0

United States of America 628,000 489,000 1,065,000 0

Scope 2 breakdown: business breakdowns

(C7.6) Indicate which gross global Scope 2 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide.

• By facility

• By activity

(C7.6b) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business facility.

Facility Scope 2, location-based (metric tons CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tons CO2e)

Lima Refinery 628,000 489,000

Lloydminster Upgrader 425,000 292,000

Sunrise Energy Project 212,000 90,000

Rainbow Lake Gas Plant 162,000 69,000

Lloydminster Ethanol Plant 111,000 88,000

Facility Scope 2, location-based (metric tons CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tons CO2e)

Tucker Thermal Project 74,000 31,000

Bolney Lloyd Thermal Project 55,000 18,000

Lloydminster Pipeline Terminal 42,000 18,000

Pikes Peak South Lloyd Thermal Project 27,000 9,000

Vawn Lloyd Thermal Project 27,000 9,000

Edam West Thermal Plant 27,000 9,000

Edam East Lloyd Thermal Project 26,000 9,000

Rush Lake Lloyd Thermal Project 25,000 8,000

Cold Lake Pipeline Terminal 24,000 10,000

Hardisty Pipeline Terminal 24,000 10,000

Lloydminster Refinery 20,000 9,000

Pikes Peak Lloyd Thermal Project 19,000 6,000

Sandall Lloyd Thermal Project 14,000 5,000

Paradise Hill Lloyd Thermal Project 12,000 4,000

All other Husky Operated Facilities 267,000 128,000

(C7.6c) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business activity.

Activity Scope 2, location-based (metric tons CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tons CO2e)

Canadian Refining and Upgrading 564,000 366,000

Conventional Oil Production 161,000 60,000

U.S. Refining 628,000 489,000

Gas Production, Gathering, and Processing 235,000 100,000

Thermal Oil Production 519,000 198,000

Other Upstream Operations 3,000 1,000

Ethanol Production 111,000 97,000

Scope 2 breakdown: sector production activities

(C-CH7.7/C-OG7.7) Break down your organization’s total gross global Scope 2 emissions by sector production activity in metric tons CO2e.

Sector production activity Scope 2, location-based, metric

tons CO2e

Scope 2, market-based (if

applicable), metric tons CO2e

Comment

Chemicals production activities* 112,000 97,000


(upstream)* 918,000 359,000


(downstream)*

1,191,000 855,000

Emissions performance

(C7.9) How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to those of the previous reporting year?

Increased

(C7.9a) Identify the reasons for any change in your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined), and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the previous year.

Reason Change in emissions

(metric tons CO2e)

Direction of

change

Emissions value

(percentage)

Please explain calculation

Change in

renewable

energy

0 No change 0 Husky had no material energy consumption from renewable

sources in 2017.


(metric tons CO2e)

Direction of

change

Emissions value

(percentage)


consumption

Other

emissions

reduction

activities

628,000 Decreased 4.7%

In 2017 Husky installed compressors at heavy oil well sites

that capture otherwise vented produced gas. The Company

estimates anticipated savings of 628,000 tonnes of CO2e

per year as a result of this project. Husky’s total combined

S1 and S2 emissions in 2016 were 13,370,000 tonnes

CO2e. Thus 628,000 / 13,370,000 * 100 = 4.7%.

Divestment 848,000 Decreased 6.3%

In 2017 Husky divested a significant portion of its Western

Canadian conventional assets, including the Ram River gas

plant. This resulted in a 848,000 tCO2e decline in the

Company’s emissions from conventional and gas assets.

Husky’s total combined S1 and S2 emissions in 2016 were

13,370,000 tonnes CO2e. Thus 848,000 / 13,370,000 * 100

= 6.3%.

Acquisitions 520,000 Increased 3.9%

In November 2017 Husky acquired the Superior Refinery.

This resulted in a 520,000 tCO2e increase in the

Company’s Scope 1 emissions from its U.S. refining assets.

Due to the timing of the acquisition, Husky does not have

2017 Scope 2 emissions estimates for the Superior Refinery

at the time of this disclosure. Husky’s total combined S1 and


(metric tons CO2e)

Direction of

change

Emissions value

(percentage)


S2 emissions in 2016 were 13,370,000 tonnes CO2e. Thus

520,000 / 13,370,000 * 100 = 3.9%.

Change in

output 1,014,000 Increased 7.6%

Increased production at the Company’s thermal facilities

(Sunrise, Tucker, Edam East and Edam West, Rush Lake,

Vawn) accounted for an increase of over 832,000 tonnes

CO2e in 2017. Further increases in throughput at the Lima

Refinery accounted for an additional increase of 382,000

tonnes CO2e in 2017.These increases were partially offset

by reductions due to decreased throughput at the

Lloydminster Upgrader due to a major turnaround in 2017,

as well as natural declines in conventional oil production.

The net change was approximately 1.01 million tonne

increase in CO2e. Husky’s total combined S1 and S2

emissions in 2016 were 13,370,000 tonnes CO2e. Thus

1,014,000 / 13,370,000 * 100 = 7.6%.

(C7.9b) Are your emissions performance calculations in C7.9 and C7.9a based on a location-based Scope 2 emissions figure or a market-based Scope 2 emissions figure?

Location-based

C8 Energy

Energy spend

(C8.1) What percentage of your total operational spend in the reporting year was on energy?

More than 15% but less than or equal to 20%

Energy-related activities

(C8.2) Select which energy-related activities your organization has undertaken.

Activity Indicate whether your organization undertakes this energy-related

activity

Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstocks) Yes

Consumption of purchased or acquired electricity Yes

Consumption of purchased or acquired heat No

Consumption of purchased or acquired steamYes

Consumption of purchased or acquired cooling No

Generation of electricity, heat, steam, or cooling Yes

(C8.2a) Report your organization’s energy consumption totals (excluding feedstocks) in MWh.

Activity Heating value MWh from renewable

sources

MWh from non-renewable

sources

Total MWh

Consumption of fuel

(excluding feedstock)

HHV (higher heating value)

0 39,140,000 39,140,000

Consumption of purchased

or acquired electricityN/A

0 2,272,000 2,272,000

Consumption of purchased

or acquired steamN/A 0 1,784,000 1,784,000

Consumption of self-

generated non-fuel

renewable energy

N/A 0 N/A 0

Total energy consumption N/A 0 43,196,000 43,196,000

(C-CH8.2a) Report your organization’s energy consumption totals (excluding feedstocks) for chemical production activities in MWh.

Activity Heating value Total MWh

Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstock) HHV (higher heating value) 623,000

Consumption of purchased or acquired

electricityN/A 86,000

Consumption of purchased or acquired steam N/A 336,000

Consumption of self-generated non-fuel

renewable energyN/A 0

Total energy consumption N/A 1,045,000

(C8.2b) Select the applications of your organization’s consumption of fuel.

Fuel application Indicate whether your organization undertakes this fuel application

Consumption of fuel for the generation of electricity Yes

Consumption of fuel for the generation of steam Yes

Consumption of fuel for the generation of No

Consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation No

(C8.2c) State how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (excluding feedstocks) by fuel type.

Identifier Fuels Heating value Total MWh consumed by

the organization

MWh consumed for self-

generation of electricity

1 Natural gas HHV 30,267,000 1,294,000

2 Refinery gas HHV 8,675,000 0

3 Diesel HHV 122,000 0

4 Marine Gas Oil HHV 63,000 17,000

5 Liquid Propane HHV 13,000 0

Identifier MWh consumed for self-

generation of heat


generation of steam


generation of cooling

MWh consumed self-

cogeneration or self-

trigeneration

1 0 20,414,000 0 0

2 0 0 0 0

3 0 0 0 0

4 0 0 0 0

5 0 0 0 0

(C8.2d) List the average emission factors of the fuels reported in C8.2c.

Fuel Emission factor Unit Emission factor source Comment

Natural gas 2436 kg CO2e per MWh

This figure is a calculated

average of all combustion

emissions Husky has

classified as Natural Gas.

Emissions from natural gas

combustion are calculated

using analyzed gas

samples that are assigned

to emissions inventories at

the equipment level.

Husky includes both

marketable and non-

marketable gas in its

natural gas fuel category

for the purposes of this

response.

Refinery gas 1743 kg CO2e per MWh

This figure is a calculated

average of all combustion

emissions Husky has

classified as Refinery Gas.

Emissions from refinery

Husky includes all refinery

gases that are not natural

gas or propane as part of

this fuel category for the

purposes of this response.

gas combustion are

calculated using analyzed

gas samples that are

assigned to emissions

inventories at the

equipment level.

Diesel 2688 kg CO2 per m3 API Compendium Table 4.1

Marine gas oil 2615 kg CO2 per m3 US EPA AP42 Table 3.1-2a

Liquid Propane 1500 kg CO2 per m3 US EPA AP42 Table 1.5-1

(C8.2e) Provide details on the electricity, heat, steam, and cooling your organization has generated and consumed in the reporting year.

Energy Carrier Total Gross generation

(MWh)

Generation that is

consumed by the

organization (MWh)

Gross generation from

renewable sources (MWh)

Generation from

renewable sources that is

consumed by the

organization (MWh)

Electricity 1,311,000 1,311,000 0 0

Heat 0 0 0 0

Steam 20,414,000 20,414,000 0 0

Cooling 0 0 0 0

(C-CH8.2e) Provide details on electricity, heat, steam, and cooling your organization has generated and consumed for chemical production activities.

Energy Carrier Total gross generation (MWh) inside

chemicals sector boundary

Generation that is consumed (MWh) inside

chemicals sector boundary

Electricity 0 0

Heat 0 0

Steam 0 0

Cooling 0 0

(C8.2f) Provide details on the electricity, heat, steam, and/or cooling amounts that were accounted for at a low-carbon emission factor in the market-based Scope 2 figure reported in C6.3.

Basis for applying a low-

carbon emission factor

Low-carbon technology

type

MWh consumed

associated with low-

carbon electricity, heat,

steam or cooling

Emission factor (in units

of metric tons CO2e per

MWh)

Comment

No purchases or

generation of low-carbon

electricity, heat, steam or

cooling accounted with a

low-carbon emission factor

Feedstock consumption: Chemicals

(C-CH8.3) Disclose details on your organization’s consumption of feedstocks for chemical production activities.

Feedstocks Total Total Inherent carbon Heating value of Heating value Comment

consumption consumption unit dioxide emission

factor of

feedstock, metric

tons CO2 per

consumption unit

feedstock, MWh

per consumption

unit

Solid biomass 744,145 Metric tons Not applicable for

fermentation CO2

emissions

associated with

ethanol production

Not applicable Not applicable

(C-CH8.3a) State the percentage, by mass, of primary resource from which your chemical feedstocks derive.

Feedstock source Percentage of total chemical feedstock (%)

Oil

0

Natural Gas 0

Coal 0

Biomass 100

Waste 0

Fossil fuel (where coal, gas, oil cannot be distinguished) 0

Unknown source or unable to disaggregate 0

C9 Additional metrics

Oil and gas production

(C-OG9.2a) Disclose your net liquid and gas hydrocarbon production (total of subsidiaries and equity-accounted entities).

Hydrocarbon category In-year net production Comment

Crude oil and condensate, million barrels 34.9 From 2017 Form 40-F: reconciliation of Proved

Reserves (p. 36)

Natural gas liquids, million barrels 6.6 From 2017 Form 40-F: reconciliation of Proved

Reserves (p. 36)

Oil sands, million barrels (includes bitumen

and synthetic crude)

43.6 From 2017 Form 40-F: reconciliation of Proved

Reserves (p. 36)

Natural gas, billion cubic feet 196.8 From 2017 Form 40-F: reconciliation of Proved

Reserves (p. 36)

Oil and gas reserves methodology

(C-OG9.2b) Explain which listing requirements or other methodologies you use to report reserves data. If your organization cannot provide data due to legal restrictions on reporting reserves figures in certain countries, please explain this.

Husky's oil and gas reserves are estimated in accordance with the standards contained in the COGEH, and the reserves data disclosed

conforms with the requirements of National Instrument 51-101 “Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities” (“NI 51-101”). All of

Husky's oil and gas reserves are prepared by internal reserves evaluation staff using a formalized process for determining, approving and

booking reserves. This process requires all reserves evaluations to be done on a consistent basis using established definitions and

guidelines. Approval of individually significant reserves changes requires review by an internal panel of expert geoscientists and qualified

reserves evaluators. The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors has examined Husky's procedures for assembling and reporting

reserves data and other information associated with oil and gas activities and has reviewed that information with management. The Board

of Directors has approved, on the recommendation of the Audit Committee, the content of Husky's disclosure of its reserves data and other

oil and gas information. The reserves in C-OG9.2 are Husky’s gross reserves, which are the working interest share of reserves before

deduction of royalties and without including any royalty interests.

Oil and gas total reserves

(C-OG9.2c) Disclose your estimated total net reserves and resource base (million BOE), including the total associated with subsidiaries and equity-accounted entities.

Estimated total net proved + probable

reserves (2P) (million BOE)

Estimated total net proved + probable +

possible reserves (3P) (million BOE)

Estimated net total resource base (million

BOE)

2436.8

Oil and gas reserves split

(C-OG9.2d) Provide an indicative percentage split for 2P, 3P reserves, and total resource base by hydrocarbon categories.

Hydrocarbon category Net proved + probable reserves

(2P) (%)

Net proved + probable +

possible reserves (3P) (%)

Net total resource base (%)

Crude oil / condensate / Natural

gas liquids

16

Natural gas 18

Oil sands (includes bitumen and

synthetic crude)66

Oil and gas split by development type

(C-OG9.2e) Provide an indicative percentage split for production, 1P, 2P, 3P reserves, and total resource base by development types.

Development type In-year net

production (%)

Net proved

reserves (1P) (%)

Net proved +

probable

reserves (2P) (%)

Net proved +

probable +

possible reserves

(3P) (%)

Net total resource

base (%)

Comment

Other: Light &

Medium Crude Oil 16% 9 % 9%

Other: Heavy Crude

Oil 14% 5% 4%

Other: Bitumen 37% 57% 66%

Other: Conventional

Natural Gas 28% 24% 18%

Other: Natural Gas

Liquids 5% 5% 3%

Comment:

The information included in the response to C-OG9.2e is prepared directly from Husky's oil and gas reserves disclosure, dated March 1,

2018, in the Company's 2017 Annual Information From, as filed on SEDAR and available on Husky's website "www.huskyenergy.com".

Husky prepares reserves information in accordance with National Instrument 51 - 101 Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities

("NI 51-101"). NI 51-101 has specific requirements for classifying oil and gas reserves by product type. The product types selected in

response to this question are in accordance with NI 51-101. Husky does not publicly disclose contingent resources (which would require

disclosure of additional items as set out in NI 51-101), accordingly, Husky has not disclosed information regarding contingent resources in

the format requested by CDP.

Chemicals production metrics

(C-CH9.3a) Provide details on your organization’s chemical products.

Output product Production

(metric tons)

Capacity

(metric tons)

Direct

emissions

intensity

Electricity

intensity (MWh

per metric ton

Steam

intensity (MWh

per metric ton

Steam/ heat

recovered

(MWh per

Comment

(metric tons

CO2e per

metric ton of

product)

of product) of product) metric ton of

product)

Ethanol 232,000 205,000 0.49 0.37 2.37 0

Total refinery throughput

(C-OG9.3a) Disclose your total refinery throughput capacity in the reporting year in thousand barrels per day.

Total refinery throughput capacity (Thousand barrels per day)

284.2

Feedstocks used in refinery

(C-OG9.3b) Disclose feedstocks processed in the reporting year in million barrels per year.

Feedstock Throughput (Millions barrels) Comment

103.7 Throughput information is from the 2017

Oil Annual Report.

Canadian refining and upgrading throughput of

106.5 mbbls/day

U.S. refining throughput of 177.7 mbbls/day

Total operated throughput of 284.2 mbbls/day *

365 days / 1000 = 103.7

Other feedstocks 1.36 Natural gas is used as feedstock for hydrogen

production through steam methane reforming

(SMR). Hydrogen is required for hydrotreating

and hydrocracking as an integral part of the

upgrading and refining operations.

8,169 MMscf total natural gas used as SMR

feedstock at Husky Downstream facilities /

6,000 MMscf/MMBOE = 1.36 MMBOE

Total 105.06

Refinery products and net production

(C-OG9.3c) Are able you able to break down your refinery products and net production?

No

Low-carbon investments: Coal / Electric utilities / Oil & gas

(C-OG9.6) Disclose your investments in low-carbon research and development (R&D), equipment, products, and services.

Investment

start date

Investment

end date

Investment

area

Technology area Investment

maturity

Investment figure Low-carbon

investment

percentage

Please explain

2016-01-01 2016-12-31 R&D Other, please specify Applied

research and

development

$157,756.29 100% Technology area:

HDR technology

development for

partial upgrading to

reduce diluent

usage. Cash

payment by

Proponent after

funding

contributions

2017-01-01 2017-12-31 R&D Other, please specify Applied

research and

development

$157,756.28 100% Technology area:

HDR partial

upgrading grant

funding received

and deferred cash

contribution

2018-01-01 2018-12-31 Property,

Plant and

Equipment

Other, please specify Pilot

demonstration$1,183,000 12% Technology area:

HDR partial

upgrading: forecast

equipment and

products

Investment

start date

Investment

end date

Investment

area

Technology area Investment

maturity

Investment figure Low-carbon

investment

percentage

Please explain

2018-01-01 2018-12-31 Services Other, please specify Pilot

demonstration

$ 8,699,000 88% Technology area:

HDR partial

upgrading:

salaries, services,

overhead, travel,

other

Breakeven price (US$/BOE)

(C-OG9.7) Disclose the breakeven price (US$/BOE) required for cash neutrality during the reporting year, i.e. where cash flow from operations covers CAPEX and dividends paid/share buybacks.

$50

Transfers & sequestration of CO2 emissions

(C-OG9.8) Is your organization involved in the sequestration of CO2?

Yes

(C-OG9.8a) Provide, in metric tons CO2, gross masses of CO2 transferred in and out of the reporting organization (as defined by the consolidation basis).

Transfer direction CO2 transferred – reporting year (metric tons CO2)

CO2 transferred in 50,153

CO2 transferred out 0

(C-OG9.8b) Provide gross masses of CO2 injected and stored for the purposes of CCS during the reporting year according to the injection and storage pathway.

Injection and storage

pathway

Injected CO2(metric tons

CO2)

Percentage of injected

CO2 intended for long-

term (>100 year) storage

Year in which injection

began

Cumulative CO2 injected

and stored (metric tons

CO2)

CO2 used for enhanced oil

recovery (EOR) or

enhanced gas recovery

(EGR)

116,839 0 2008 545,839

(C-OG9.8c) Provide clarification on any other relevant information pertaining to your activities related to transfer and sequestration of CO2.

Husky injects CO2 into several reservoirs in the Lloydminster area of Saskatchewan for the purposes of enhanced oil recovery.

C10 Verification

Verification

(C10.1) Indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported emissions.

Scope Verification/assurance status

Scope 1 Third-party verification or assurance process in place

Scope 2 (location-based or market-based) Third-party verification or assurance process in place

Scope 3 No third-party verification or assurance

(C10.1a) Provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 1 and/or Scope 2 emissions and attach the relevant statements.

Scope Verification

or assurance

cycle in

place

Status in the

current

reporting year

Type of

verification or

assurance

Attach the

statement

Page/section

reference

Relevant standard Proportion

of reported

emissions

verified (%)

Scope Verification

or assurance

cycle in

place

Status in the

current

reporting year

Type of

verification or

assurance

Attach the

statement

Page/section

reference

Relevant standard Proportion

of reported

emissions

verified (%)

Scope 1 Annual

process

Complete Limited

assurance

2017 Husky

Energy

Sustainability

Assurance

Engagement

Letter

Husky 2018 ESG

report: Independent

Limited Assurance

Report - page 41 &

42

ISAE3000 100

Scope 2

location based

Annual

processComplete Limited

assurance

2017 Husky

Energy

Sustainability

Assurance

Engagement

Letter

Husky 2018 ESG

report: Independent

Limited Assurance

Report - page 41 &

42

ISAE3000 100

Other verified data

(C10.2) Do you verify any climate-related information reported in your CDP disclosure other than the emissions figures reported in C6.1, C6.3, and C6.5?

Yes

(C10.2a) Which data points within your CDP disclosure have been verified, and which verification standards were used?

Disclosure module verification

relates to

Data verified Verification standard Please explain

C4. Targets and performance Progress against emissions

reduction targetISO14064-3 For facilities that are governed by

the Alberta Specified Gas Emitters

Regulation, verification work is in

relation to a baseline year for the

purposes of evaluating progress

towards emissions reduction

obligations.

C11 Carbon pricing

Carbon pricing systems

(C11.1) Are any of your operations or activities regulated by a carbon pricing system (i.e. ETS, Cap & Trade or Carbon Tax)?

Yes

(C11.1a) Select the carbon pricing regulation(s) which impacts your operations.

• Alberta carbon tax

• Alberta SGER

• BC carbon tax

• Ontario CaT

(C11.1b) Complete the following table for each of the emissions trading systems in which you participate.

System name % of Scope 1 emissions covered

by the ETS

Period start date Period end date

Alberta SGER 20.8% 01/01/2017 31/12/2017

ON CaT 0% 01/01/2017 31/12/2017

Allowances allocated Allowances purchased Verified emissions in

metric tons CO2e

Details of ownership Comment

2,512,540 0 2,319,559.88 Other: Operated and

owned outright or jointly

Husky’s Sunrise and

Tucker thermal facilities

participate in the Alberta

SGER. Neither facility had

a compliance obligation in

2017. Sunrise was

undergoing baseline

emissions monitoring and

Tucker exceeded its SGER

target.

0 181,000 0 Other: Operated and

owned outright or jointly

Husky purchased Ontario

cap and trade allowances

for fuel that was imported

into the province for sale at

its fuel outlets in 2017.

(C11.1c) Complete the following table for each of the tax systems in which you participate.

Pricing system Period start date Period end date % of emissions

covered by tax

Total cost of tax paid Comment

Alberta Carbon Tax 01/01/2017 31/12/2017 0.83% $1,827,681.58

BC Carbon Tax 01/01/2017 31/12/2017 1.07% $3,200,000

(C11.1d) What is your strategy for complying with the systems in which you participate or anticipate participating?

Husky seeks to reduce emissions at its facilities through improved energy and emissions management and offsets the balance of

compliance obligations through the use of emissions performance credits, purchases of project based carbon offsets, and purchases of

Climate Change Emissions Management Fund credits. For example, at the Tucker thermal facility, Husky was able to exceed its 2017

compliance target by 99% through the optimization of steam systems.

Project-based carbon credits

(C11.2) Has your organization originated or purchased any project-based carbon credits within the reporting period?

Yes

(C11.2a) Provide details of the project-based carbon credits originated or purchased by your organization in the reporting period.

Credit origination or credit

purchase

Project type Project identification Verified to which standard

Credit origination Methane avoidance Cap-Op Energy Emission

Reductions from Pneumatic

Devices (Pool B)

Other: Project verified to

Reasonable level assurance, ISO

14064-3 and the following

standards:

- Climate Change and Emissions

Management Act

• Carbon Competitiveness

Incentive Regulation (255/2017)

• Standard for Greenhouse Gas

Emission Offset Project

Developers, Version 1.0,

December 2017

• Standard for Verification, Version

1.0, December 2017

• Quantification Protocol for

Greenhouse Gas Emission

Reductions from Pneumatic

Devices, Version 2.0, January

2017. Purpose: compliance

mechanisms

Credit origination Energy efficiency: industry Husky Oil Operations (Tucker

thermal project)

Other: Credits verified to

reasonable level assurance, ISO

14064-3 and Specified Gas

Emitters Regulation (139/2017)

Number of credits (metric tons

CO2e)

Number of credits (metric tons

CO2e): Risk adjusted volume

Credits cancelled Purpose, e.g. compliance

14647 14647 No Compliance

252241 252241 No Compliance

Internal price on carbon

(C11.3) Does your organization use an internal price on carbon?

Yes

(C11.3a) Provide details of how your organization uses an internal price on carbon.

Objective for

implementing an

internal carbon price

GHG Scope Application Actual price(s) used

(Currency /metric ton)

Variance of price(s)

used

Type of internal carbon

price

Impact & implication

• Navigate GHG

regulations

• Stakeholder

expectations

• Change internal

behavior

• Drive energy

efficiency

• Stress test

investments

• Scope 1 Upstream and

Downstream

Canadian

operations

50 Husky employs a

geographically

differentiated

shadow price that

is sensitive to the

realistic pricing

assumptions of

each jurisdiction in

which it operates.

For Canada, this

results in an

evolutionary

pricing model that

is based on the

proposed Pan-

Shadow price Husky uses an

internal price on

carbon to evaluate

projects in

jurisdictions where

there is a

regulatory

compliance

obligation for GHG

emissions or

where there is a

reasonable

expectation that

additional material

compliance

Canadian Climate

Framework, which

calls for annual

escalating prices

approaching

$50/tonne by

2022. The starting

point for this

pricing varies by

province based on

the carbon pricing

regulations

currently in place.

obligations will be

implemented in the

near to mid-term.

The Company

considers both the

cost and value of

GHGs; for

example, Husky

places a value on

CO2 as a means

to enhance heavy

oil production. For

example, Husky

has evaluated

investments in

energy efficiency

at the Sunrise and

Tucker thermal

facilities using

internal carbon

pricing in line with

current and

proposed

regulations of $30

per tonne,

escalating to $50

per tonne by 2022

to determine

additional

sensitivity for the

projects.

C12 Engagement

Value chain engagement

(C12.1) Do you engage with your value chain on climate-related issues?

• Yes, our suppliers

• Yes, other partners in the value chain

(C12.1a) Provide details of your climate-related supplier engagement strategy.

Type of engagement Details of engagement % of suppliers

by number

% total

procurement

spend (direct and

indirect)

% Scope 3 emissions as

reported in C6.5

Rationale for the coverage

of your engagement

Impact of engagement,

including measures of

success

Comment

Compliance and onboarding Included climate change in supplier

selection / management

mechanism

100% of new

suppliers

0.31% This source of Scope 3

GHG emissions is not

material when compared

against the emissions

related to the end-use

combustion and / or

oxidation of the products

sold by Husky.

All new suppliers are

required to answer a series

of questions in the supplier

pre -qualification and

qualification questionnaire.

In this questionnaire,

suppliers are asked on

whether they disclose their

climate-related information

specifically to CDP. They

are also asked if they

comply with all applicable

environmental laws and

regulations, which include

climate-related regulations

within their jurisdiction.

Impact: Suppliers

become aware that

Husky is interested in

their climate risks

disclosure.

Measure of success:

Getting new suppliers to

complete the

questionnaire.

0.31% = new

suppliers contracted

in 2017, over 2017’s

total procurement

spend

Engagement &

incentivization (changing

supplier behavior)

Emissions reduction incentives 19.2% 33.6% This source of Scope 3

GHG emissions is not

material when compared

against the emissions

related to the end-use

combustion and / or

oxidation of the products

sold by Husky

In 2016, Husky joined the

SmartWay Transport

Partnership. This

collaboration is designed to

help businesses reduce fuel

costs while transporting

goods in the cleanest, most

efficient way possible.

SmartWay works with

freight carriers and shippers

that are committed to

benchmarking their

operations, tracking their

fuel consumption and

improving their annual

performance. While not all

Husky suppliers are

SmartWay members, as the

Impact: Husky’s

Canadian Products

Marketing business unit

participates to drive fuel

cost reductions,

contributing to improved

efficiency, and engages

on best practices in the

freight supply chain.

Measure of Success:

Onboarding additional

carriers. Over 50% of the

total kilometers driven

within Canadian

Products Marketing’s

Downstream operations

are SmartWay carriers.

19.2% = SmartWay-

registered carriers

for Canadian

Products Marketing

load (5 carriers out

of 26 total)

33.6% = Total spend

on these carriers

over total

procurement spend

on freight services.

Type of engagement Details of engagement % of suppliers

by number

% total

procurement

spend (direct and

indirect)

% Scope 3 emissions as

reported in C6.5

Rationale for the coverage

of your engagement

Impact of engagement,

including measures of

success

Comment

program grows, Husky

anticipates further fuel

efficiency and cost

improvements in the supply

chain.

(C12.1c) Give details of your climate-related engagement strategy with other partners in the value chain.

Husky engages with its JV partners on large projects through JV committees that discuss numerous issues, including GHG emissions.

Specifically, Husky and BP collaborate on GHG issues related to BP-Husky Refining LLC and the Sunrise Energy Project with the aim of

achieving compliance strategy consensus. Husky prioritizes GHG engagement with value chain partners where there is a major risk posed

by exposure to climate-related issues such as regulatory changes. Success is measured through financial indicators, including performance

against carbon-related fee targets for facilities that fall under a regulatory scheme that includes a compliance cost for carbon emissions.

Public policy engagement

(C12.3) Do you engage in activities that could either directly or indirectly influence public policy on climate-related issues through any of the following?

• Direct engagement with policy makers

• Trade associations

• Funding research organizations

(C12.3a) On what issues have you been engaging directly with policy makers?

Focus of legislation Corporate position Details of engagement Proposed legislative solution

Carbon tax Support Husky continues to directly engage with

provincial and federal government

agencies through pro-active outreach, as

well as through input to industry

associations representing broad industry

consensus.

Husky supports efforts to price

carbon in a way that is equitable

for all GHG emitters and preserves

industry competitiveness.

Regulation of methane emissions Support Husky continues to directly engage with


agencies through proactive outreach, as



consensus.

Husky supports incentives for early

action on methane emission

reductions that give industry the

flexibility to manage reductions

efficiently.

Other: Clean Fuel Standard Support with major exceptions Husky continues to directly engage with


agencies through pro-active outreach, as



consensus.

Husky supports efforts to reduce

the carbon intensity of all fuels,

including transportation fuels,

provided regulators recognize the

impact of overlapping carbon

regulations on the refining sector

and the market can pursue

compliance through all types of

fuel.

(C12.3b) Are you on the board of any trade associations or do you provide funding beyond membership?

Yes

(C12.3c) Enter the details of those trade associations that are likely to take a position on climate change legislation.

Trade association Is your position

on climate

change

consistent with

theirs?

Please explain the trade association’s position How have you

influenced, or are you

attempting to influence

the position?

Canadian Association

of Petroleum Producers

(CAPP)

Consistent CAPP’s climate change policy principles as shown at

http://www.capp.ca/responsible-development/air-and-climate/climate-

change CAPP’s climate change policy principles are 1. Collaborative

and Solutions-oriented (e.g. Given Canada’s climate commitments and

industry impacts, CAPP will proactively collaborate with governments

and stakeholders towards appropriate policy solutions.) 2. Efficient,

effective and predictable (e.g. Climate policy should target reductions

where they are most efficient and effective right across the entire

energy value chain from production to end use and considering fairly

all sectors and jurisdictions.) 3. Technology and innovation focused

(e.g. Policy should incent technology and innovation to address climate

change, and capture the opportunity to export solutions to the world.)

4. Globally competitive (e.g. Canada’s climate policies must ensure our

resource development is cost and carbon competitive with other

jurisdictions, especially the U.S. as our largest trading partner.)

Husky participates in

working groups within

CAPP to inform the

industry association’s

position relative to climate

change policy in Canada.

Canadian Fuels

Association (CFA)

Consistent CFA’s policy position is presented at

http://www.canadianfuels.ca/Issues-Policy/Policy-Positions/#Climate

Climate Change / GHG Emission Reduction To address the risks of

climate change, reducing GHG emissions has become an important

global issue. Under the auspices of the Paris Agreement, virtually

every country has committed to reduce their GHG emissions. For

Canada, our collective efforts to achieve a sustainable, lower carbon

future must be founded on three key actions: • Explore, define and

evaluate GHG emission-reduction pathways in collaboration with all

stakeholders before targets are set. • Recognize Canada’s productivity

and competitiveness as core considerations in the development and

implementation of a national GHG-reduction strategy. • Ensure that

sound evidence and cost-benefit analyses drive decision-making and

are transparently shared with citizens. Climate policy has far reaching

implications for citizens, business and society in general. Canadian

Husky participates in

working groups within

CFA to inform the industry

association’s position

relative to climate change

policy in Canada.

Fuels Association and its members support policy approaches that

minimize the overall cost to society of reducing climate risks. Broad-

based carbon pricing mechanisms that are transparent, uniform and

predictable are useful tools to send clear price signals across the

economy that can effectively and efficiently reduce Canada’s carbon

footprint.

(C12.3d) Do you publicly disclose a list of all research organizations that you fund?

Yes

(C12.3f) What processes do you have in place to ensure that all of your direct and indirect activities that influence policy are consistent with your overall climate change strategy?

Key individuals in the business units and supporting service groups collaborate to align Husky’s position through the Carbon Management

Regulatory Monitoring Committee. The Company’s climate change strategy is clearly communicated to policy makers either directly or

through participation in industry association working groups within the jurisdictions where the Company operates. In 2017, Husky continued

to support consistency in policy advocacy through the Company’s Carbon Management Critical Competency Network, Carbon

Management Regulatory Monitoring Committee and activity within the GHG management framework. Husky’s Government Relations

department works with the Carbon Management Critical Competency Network and Company representatives involved in policy

engagement to ensure that policy advocacy activities are aligned.

Communications

(C12.4) Have you published information about your organization’s response to climate change and GHG emissions performance for this reporting year in places other than in your CDP response? If so, please attach the publication(s).

Publication Status Attach the document Content elements

In voluntary sustainability report Complete See 2018 ESG report • Governance

• Strategy

• Risks & Opportunities

• Emissions figures

• Other metrics

In mainstream reports Complete See Husky’s 2017 AIF and MD&A• Governance

• Risks & Opportunities

In other regulatory filings Complete • Emissions figures

• Emission targets

C14 Signoff

Signoff

(C14.1) Provide details for the person that has signed off (approved) your CDP climate change response.

Job title Corresponding job category

Chief Operating Officer Chief Operating Officer (COO)

Important Information

Companies should not consider their CDP response a means of complying with any regulatory requirement to share financially

sensitive non-public information with the market. You may wish to consult with your financial, legal, and/or compliance

departments for advice on your company’s general approach to the provision of forward-looking statements and information

concerning risks.

CDP questionnaire copyright and licensed use

The copyright to CDP’s annual questionnaire/s is owned by CDP Worldwide, a registered charity number 1122330 and a company

limited by guarantee, registered in England number 05013650. Any use of any part of the questionnaire, including the questions,

must be licensed by CDP. Any unauthorized use is prohibited and CDP reserves the right to protect its copyright by all legal

means necessary.

Terms for responding to Investors (2018 Climate Change)

These terms apply if you are submitting a response to the CDP Climate Change Questionnaire 2018 to Investors. If you are also

submitting a response to Supply Chain Members the Terms for responding to Supply Chain Members (2018 Climate Change),

below, will also apply.

1.DEFINITIONS

Billing Company: means the organization determined in accordance with the table at the end of these terms.

CDP: means CDP Worldwide, a charitable company registered with the Charity Commission of England and Wales (registered charity no.

1122330 and a company number 05013650). References to “we”, “our” and “us” in these terms are references to CDP and the Billing

Company.

Deadline: means 15 August 2018.

Fee: means the fee set out in the table at the end of these terms, which is exclusive of any applicable taxes.

Full version: means the version of the Questionnaire which contains all questions that are applicable to you.

Minimum version: means the version of the Questionnaire which contains a subset of the questions included in the Full Version.

Personal Data: means data which relates to an individual who can be identified from the data, such as a person’s name and job title.

Questionnaire: means the Full Version and the Minimum Version of the CDP Climate Change Questionnaire 2018.

Responding Company: means the company responding to the Questionnaire. References to “you” and “your” in these terms are

references to the Responding Company.

2.PARTIES

The parties to these terms shall be CDP, the Billing Company (where the Billing Company is not CDP) and the Responding Company.

3.THESE TERMS

These are the terms that apply when you submit a response to our Questionnaire to Investors. If you do not agree to these terms, please

contact us at [email protected] to discuss them with us.

4.RESPONDING TO OUR QUESTIONNAIRE

General. When responding to our Questionnaire, you will be given a choice as to whether your response can be made public or whether

your response is non-public. We strongly encourage you to make your response public.

Deadline for responding. You must submit your response to us using our online response system by the Deadline for your response to be

eligible for scoring and inclusion in any reports.

Public responses. If you agree that your response can be made public, we may use and make it available for all purposes that we decide

(whether for a fee or otherwise), including, for example, making your responses available on our website, to our investor signatories and

other third parties and scoring your response.

Non-public responses. If your response is non-public, we may use it only as follows:

(a) make it available as soon as it is received by CDP to our investor signatories (as listed on our website) either directly or through

Bloomberg terminals, for any use within their organizations but not for publication unless any data from your response has been

anonymized or aggregated in such manner that it has the effect of being anonymized;

(b) make it available as soon as it is received by CDP to our group companies and affiliates (for example, CDP North America, Inc), our

country partners, research partners, report writers and scoring partners:

(i) to score your response; and

(ii) for any other use within their organizations but not for publication unless any data from your response has been anonymized or

aggregated in such manner that it has the effect of being anonymized.

Amending your response. You may amend a response that you have submitted at any time before the Deadline. After the Deadline has

passed, your response can only be amended by our staff and we may charge a fee. Please note that any changes that you make to your

response after the Deadline may not be reflected in any score or in any report.

Scoring of responses to the Full Version (of the Questionnaire). If you submit your response to the Full Version in English using our

online response system:

(a) by the Deadline, your response will be scored;

(b) after the Deadline but on or before 1 October 2018 you can request an ‘On-Demand’ score for a fee. Please email

[email protected] for more information on On-Demand scoring.

Please contact your local CDP office for information about scoring if you intend to submit your response in a language other than English.

Scoring of responses to the Minimum Version (of the Questionnaire). Responses to the Minimum Version will only be scored in certain

circumstances. Please contact your local CDP office for further information.

Publication of scores. If you are responding to a CDP Climate Change Questionnaire for the first time you may choose for your score to

be “private” but in all other cases CDP may publish your score, regardless of whether your response is public or non-public. If you choose

for your score to be “private”, unless you achieve an A grade in which case we may make your score public, we may only make it available

to our group companies and affiliates (for example, CDP North America, Inc), our country partners, research partners, report writers and

scoring partners, in each case for any use within their organizations but not for publication. Note that if you also submit your response to

Supply Chain Members it will also be available to any Supply Chain Member that has asked you to respond to the Questionnaire. For

further details please see the Terms for responding to Supply Chain Members (2018 Climate Change).

5.FEE

Fee. We are a not-for-profit organization and charge certain companies an annual administrative fee to enable us to maintain the disclosure

system. Unless you are exempt from paying the Fee, as set out below, if you are listed, incorporated or headquartered in a country that is

listed in the next paragraph, you are required to pay the Fee plus any applicable taxes. The Fee is payable once regardless of how many

responses (climate change, forests and water security) you submit in 2018. Please note that we may charge an additional fee if you want to

change your response after you have submitted your response and you are seeking to make the change after the Deadline or if you submit

your response after the Deadline and you would like it to be scored.

Countries where the Fee applies. A Responding Company will be required to pay the Fee if it is listed, incorporated or headquartered in

any one of the following countries:

Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belgium, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Cayman Islands, Channel Islands, Chile, Colombia, Denmark,

Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New

Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand,

Turkey, the UK or the USA.

Exemptions from the Fee. A Responding Company is exempt from paying the Fee if:

(a) it falls within one of CDP’s investor samples and it has not submitted a response to CDP in the last three years; or

(b) it is responding only to CDP’s supply chain request.

Please note we will decide in our absolute discretion as to whether the Fee is payable or not and we will notify you before you submit your

response. A full list of companies in our investor samples is available on our website.

Payment of the Fee. You must pay the Fee by credit or debit card or request an invoice via CDP’s online corporate dashboard, which must

be paid within such time as set out in the invoice. Please note that you will not be able to submit your response unless you have paid the

Fee, you have requested an invoice or you are exempt from paying the Fee.

6.RIGHTS IN THE RESPONSES

Ownership. All intellectual property rights in your response will be owned by you or your licensors.

License. You grant to us, or shall procure for us, a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, assignable, sub-licensable, royalty-free and

global license to use your response and any copyright and data base rights in your response for the uses set out in these terms.

7.IMPORTANT REPRESENTATIONS

You confirm that:

(a) the person submitting the response to us is authorized by you to submit the response;

(b) you have obtained all necessary consents and permissions to submit the response to us; and

(c) the response that you submit:

(i) does not infringe the rights of any third party (including privacy, publicity or intellectual property rights);

(ii) does not defame any third party; and

(iii) does not include any Personal Data.

8.LIABILITY

We do not exclude or limit in any way our liability to you where it would be unlawful to do so. This includes liability for death or

personal injury caused by our negligence or the negligence of our employees, agents or subcontractors; for fraud or fraudulent

misrepresentation.

We are not liable for business losses. Subject to these terms, CDP and the Billing Company have no liability to you in any circumstances

for any loss of revenue, loss of profit, loss of business, business interruption, loss of business opportunity, loss of goodwill, loss of

reputation, loss of, damage to or corruption of data or software or any indirect or consequential loss or damage.

Exclusion of liability. Subject to these terms, CDP and the Billing Company have no liability to you in any circumstances arising from the

content or submission of your response to us, our use of your response and/or the use of your response by any third parties.

Limitation of liability. Subject to these terms, CDP and the Billing Company’s total liability to you in all circumstances shall be limited to an

amount equivalent to the Fee or to £625 if you are not required to pay the Fee.

9.GENERAL

We may transfer our rights to someone else. We may transfer our rights and obligations under these terms to another organization.

Nobody else has any rights under these terms. These terms are between you and us. No other person shall have any rights to enforce

any of its terms.

Entire agreement. These terms constitute the entire agreement between you and us unless you also choose to share your response with

supply chain members, in which case you will also be subject to our Terms for responding to Supply Chain Members (2018 Climate

Change).

Variation. CDP (acting on its own behalf and the Billing Company’s behalf, if applicable) reserves the right to change these terms at any

time. Such changes shall be effective immediately or such other time as CDP elects. In the event of any materially adverse changes, you

may request to withdraw your response within 30 days of us notifying you of the change.

If a court finds part of these terms illegal, the rest will continue in force. Each of the paragraphs of these terms operates separately. If

any court or relevant authority decides that any of them are unlawful, the remaining paragraphs will remain in full force and effect.

Governing law and jurisdiction. These terms are governed by English law and you and us both agree to the exclusive jurisdiction of the

English courts to resolve any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these terms or their subject matter or formation.

Language. If these terms are translated into any language other than English, the English language version will prevail.

10.AMOUNT OF FEE

Location of Responding Company Fee (exclusive of any applicable taxes)

Brazil BRL 3,560

India INR 67,000

Japan JPY 97,500

UK GBP 625

Europe (excluding UK) EUR 925

Rest of the world USD 975

11.BILLING COMPANY

Billing Company Location of Responding Company

CDP Worldwide Australia, Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Channel Islands,

Hong Kong, Indonesia, Ireland, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines,

Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey,

United Kingdom

CDP Worldwide (Europe) gGmbH Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy,

Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden,

Switzerland

CDP North America, Inc Canada, USA

Carbon Disclosure Project (Latin America) Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru

Carbon Disclosure Project India India

••••••

CDP Worldwide-Japan

Japan

If the Responding Company is located in a territory that is not listed in the table above, the Billing Company shall be CDP Worldwide.

Terms for responding to Supply Chain Members (2018 Climate Change)

These terms apply if you are submitting a response to the CDP Climate Change Questionnaire 2018 to Supply Chain Members. If

you are also submitting a response to Investors the Terms for responding to Investors (2018 Climate Change), above, will also

apply.

1.DEFINITIONS

CDP: means CDP Worldwide, a charitable company registered with the Charity Commission of England and Wales (registered charity no.

1122330 and a company number 05013650). References to “we”, “our” and “us” in these terms are references to CDP.

Deadline: means 29 August 2018.

Full version: means the version of the Questionnaire which contains all questions that are applicable to you.

Minimum version: means the version of the Questionnaire which contains a subset of the questions included in the Full Version.

Personal Data: means data which relates to an individual who can be identified from the data, such as a person’s name and job title.

Questionnaire: means the Full Version and the Minimum Version of the CDP Climate Change Questionnaire 2018.

Responding Company: means the company responding to the Questionnaire. References to “you” and “your” in these terms are

references to the Responding Company.

Supply Chain Member: means an organization that is requesting data from its suppliers.

2.PARTIES

The parties to these terms shall be CDP and the Responding Company.

3.THESE TERMS

These are the terms that apply when you submit a response to our Questionnaire to Supply Chain Members. If you do not agree to these

terms, please contact us at [email protected] to discuss them with us.

4.RESPONDING TO OUR QUESTIONNAIRE

General. When responding to our Questionnaire, you will be given a choice as to whether your response can be made public or whether

your response is non-public. We strongly encourage you to make your response public, but in either case, we will not divulge the

relationship between you and any Supply Chain Member that has asked you to respond other than to our group companies and affiliates

(for example, CDP North America, Inc), our country partners, research partners, report writers and scoring partners, all of which are obliged

to keep such relationship confidential.

Deadline for responding. You must submit your response to us using our online response system by the Deadline for your response to be

eligible for scoring and inclusion in any reports.

Public responses. If you agree that your response can be made public, we may use and make it available for all purposes that we decide

(whether for a fee or otherwise), including, for example, making your responses available on our website, to our investor signatories and

other third parties and scoring your response. Note that information you submit within the Supply Chain module (2018 climate change) will

be treated as non-public (see below for details).

Non-public responses. If your response is non-public, we may use it only as follows:

(a) make it available as soon as it is received by CDP to any Supply Chain Member that has asked you to respond to the Questionnaire for

any use within their organization but not for publication unless any data from your response has been anonymized or aggregated in such

manner that it has the effect of being anonymized;

(b) make it available as soon as it is received by CDP to our group companies and affiliates, our country partners, research partners, report

writers and scoring partners:

(i) to score your response; and

(ii) for any other use within their organizations but not for publication unless any data from your response has been anonymized or

aggregated in such manner that it has the effect of being anonymized.

Supply Chain module (2018 climate change). Information you submit in response to the Supply Chain module (2018 climate change)

(questions SC0, SC1, SC2, SC3 and SC4 of the Questionnaire) will be treated as non-public even if you choose to make your response

public. Questions SC1.1, SC2.1, SC2.2a, SC3.1a and SC4.2e ask you to select a Supply Chain Member using a drop-down menu in our

online response system, and only the Supply Chain Member you select for each row will have access to the information in it. For all other

questions in the Supply Chain module (2018 climate change) the information you submit will be accessible to any Supply Chain Member

that has asked you to respond to the Questionnaire. All information you submit in the Supply Chain module (2018 climate change) will be

accessible to CDP and to our group companies and affiliates, our country partners, research partners, report writers and scoring partners,

all of which are obliged to keep such information confidential.

Amending your response. You may amend a response that you have submitted at any time before the Deadline. After the Deadline has

passed, your response can only be amended by our staff and we may charge a fee. Please note that any changes that you make to your

response after the Deadline may not be reflected in any score or in any report.

Scoring of responses to the Full Version (of the Questionnaire). If you submit your response to the Full Version in English using our

online response system:

(a) by the Deadline, your response will be scored;

(b) after the Deadline but on or before 1 October 2018 you can request an ‘On-Demand’ score for a fee. Please email

[email protected] for more information on On-Demand scoring.

Please contact your local CDP office for information about scoring if you intend to submit your response in a language other than English.

Scoring of responses to the Minimum Version (of the Questionnaire). Responses to the Minimum Version will only be scored in certain

circumstances. Please contact your local CDP office for further information.

Publication of scores. Unless you achieve an A grade, in which case we may make your score public, we may only make your score

available to any Supply Chain Member that has asked you to respond to the Questionnaire, our group companies and affiliates (for

example, CDP North America, Inc), our country partners, research partners, report writers and scoring partners, in each case for any use

within their organizations but not for publication.

5.RIGHTS IN THE RESPONSES

Ownership. All intellectual property rights in your response will be owned by you or your licensors.

License. You grant to us, or shall procure for us, a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, assignable, sub-licensable, royalty-free and

global license to use your response and any copyright and data base rights in your response for the uses set out in these terms.

6.IMPORTANT REPRESENTATIONS

You confirm that:

(a) the person submitting the response to us is authorized by you to submit the response;

(b) you have obtained all necessary consents and permissions to submit the response to us; and

(c) the response that you submit:

(i) does not infringe the rights of any third party (including privacy, publicity or intellectual property rights);

(ii) does not defame any third party; and

(iii) does not include any Personal Data.

7.LIABILITY

We do not exclude or limit in any way our liability to you where it would be unlawful to do so. This includes liability for death or

personal injury caused by our negligence or the negligence of our employees, agents or subcontractors; for fraud or fraudulent

misrepresentation.

We are not liable for business losses. Subject to these terms, CDP has no liability to you in any circumstances for any loss of revenue,

loss of profit, loss of business, business interruption, loss of business opportunity, loss of goodwill, loss of reputation, loss of, damage to or

corruption of data or software or any indirect or consequential loss or damage.

Exclusion of liability. Subject to these terms, CDP has no liability to you in any circumstances arising from the content or submission of

your response to us, our use of your response and/or the use of your response by any third parties.

Limitation of liability. Subject to these terms, CDP’s total liability to you in all circumstances shall be limited to £625.

8.GENERAL

We may transfer our rights to someone else. We may transfer our rights and obligations under these terms to another organization.

Nobody else has any rights under these terms. These terms are between you and us. No other person shall have any rights to enforce

any of its terms.

Entire agreement. These terms constitute the entire agreement between you and us, unless you also choose to share your response with

investors in which case you will also be subject to our Terms for responding to Investors (2018 Climate Change).

Variation. CDP reserves the right to change these terms at any time. Such changes shall be effective immediately or such other time as

CDP elects. In the event of any materially adverse changes, you may request to withdraw your response within 30 days of us notifying you

of the change.

If a court finds part of these terms illegal, the rest will continue in force. Each of the paragraphs of these terms operates separately. If

any court or relevant authority decides that any of them are unlawful, the remaining paragraphs will remain in full force and effect.

Governing law and jurisdiction. These terms are governed by English law and you and us both agree to the exclusive jurisdiction of the

English courts to resolve any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these terms or their subject matter or formation.

Language. If these terms are translated into any language other than English, the English language version will prevail.

About CDP

CDP is an international non-profit that drives companies and governments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, safeguard water

resources and protect forests.

Voted number one climate research provider by investors and working with institutional investors with assets of US$100 trillion, we leverage

investor and buyer power to motivate companies to disclose and manage their environmental impacts.

Over 6,300 companies with some 55% of global market capitalization disclosed environmental data through CDP in 2017. This is in

addition to the over 500 cities and 100 states and regions who disclosed, making CDP’s platform one of the richest sources of information

globally on how companies and governments are driving environmental change. CDP, formerly Carbon Disclosure Project, is a founding

member of the We Mean Business Coalition. Please visit www.cdp.net or follow us @CDP to find out more.

What is the legal status of CDP?

CDP Worldwide (CDP) is a UK Registered Charity no. 1122330 and a company limited by guarantee registered in England no. 05013650.

The charity has wholly owned subsidiaries in Germany and China and companies in Australia, Brazil and India over which it exercises

control through majority Board representation. In the US, CDP North America, Inc. is an independently incorporated affiliate which has

United States IRS 501(c)(3) charitable status.

© 2018 CDP Worldwide

cdp climate change questionnaire 2018

Documents